\iy. 



t'^.*^ 



fTf -vy^ J^;;,. 



lis 



'4» 




> 



t'^''^ 



•'*^ 



k-i^ 




aass_JBAn^ I 

Book ~B3 , ■ 



% 






,iVV 



4V4 






•Q|£k»3'' 



THE 



REFORMER REFORMED 



OR A SECOND PART OF THE 



ERMORS OF HOrKI^^SMXISM 



DETECTED AND REFUTED: 



»EI>'0 AN EXAMINATION OF MR. 8ETH WILLISTON S 
" VINDICATION OF SOME OF THE MOST ESSENTIAL 
DOCTINES OF THE REFORMATION." 



BY NATHAN BANGS, 

MINISTER OF THE GOSPEL.' 



* When reason is against a man, a man will be against reason." Dr. Reid. 

" Behold, yp trust in lying words, that cannot profit. Will ye steal, murder, 
und commit adulterj', and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk 
nfter other pods wliom ye know not; and come and stand before me in this 
house, which is called by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these 
abominations .'" Jeremiah viii. 9, 10, 11. 



:n'ew.york^ 

PRINTED BY JOHN C. TOTTEK, 
No. 9 Bowerj. 

1813, 



^\%^'^ 



SOUTHERN DIST^CT OF NETV-YORK, «s. 

/■^^ BE I^ REMEMBERED, that on the seventh day of Augnst, 

< T s ? in the forty-third year of the Independence of the United States of 

i ' ' y America, Nathan Bangs, of the said District, has deposited in this 

N«»v^ office the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as Author, is 

the words and figures follo^ving, to wit : 

" The Reformer Reformed : or a second part of the Errors of Hopkinsianism 
detected and refuted : being an examination of Mr. Seth Williston's "Vindica- 
tion of some of the most essential doctrines of the reformation." By Kathan 
Bangs, minister of the gospel. 

" When reason is against a man, a man will be against reason." — Dr. Reid. 
" Behold, ye trust in lying words, that cannot profit. Will ye steal, murder, 
and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and burn incense unto Baal, and walk 
after other gods whom ye know not ; and come and stand before me in this 
?>ouse, which is called by my name, and say, We are delivered to do all these 
abominations?" — Jeremiah Viu. 9, 10, 11." 

In conformity to the Act of the Congress of the United States, entitled "An 
Act for the encouragement of Learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, 
aiid Books to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein 
mentioned." And also to an Act, entitled " an Act, supplementary to an Act, en- 
titled an Act for the encouragement of Learning, by securing the copies of Maps, 
Charts, and Books to the authors and proprieters of such copies, during the 
Mmes therein mentioned, and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of de- 
;r5^ningj engraving, and etching historiceil and other prints." 

JAMES DILL, Clerk oftfie Southern District of Nete-YorJc. 



PREFACE. 



Custom has estabhsbed the propriety of assigniog reasons for 
presenting publications to the world. 

The sermons of Mr. Williston were considered a direct as- 
sault upon our doctrines; and to repel that assault, the Errors 
of Hopkinsianism was written and published. Although a com- 
mencement in this controversy on our part, might be consider- 
ed a needless intrusion upon the public attention ; yet, wc think 
that defending ourselves when assailed, is perfectly justifiable. 
Who will say we ought silently to look on while our antagonista 
are wielding the sword of controversy over our heads ? This 
consideration then, of acting on the defensive, is offered as aij 
apology, if an apology for defending the truth be necessary, for 
continuing this polemical discussion. 

• Though excited simply from a sense of duty to publish the 
Errors of Hopkinsianism, in doing it, the author felt all that 
fear and diiEdence, which the irr^^tancc of the subject, a con- 
sciousness of his inability to do it justice, and the prospect of 
exposing himself, under many disadvantages to the eye of a 
criticising world, were calculated to impress. The favourable 
reception however which that little performance met with by 
the kind partiality of friends, and theiuAvard satisfaction result- 
ing from a conviction of having acted under the influence of an 
honest desire to promote the cause of divine truth, amply com- 
pensate for any disagreeable s^sations growing out of the cir- 
cumstances of the case, and afford no small consolation and sup- 
port. For, notwithstanding the many imperfections of that 
work, it met with a sale quite bevond expectation, and was 
treated with greater kindness than was anticipated. Some, to 
be sure, have handled it rough enough ; for, if report may be 
relied on, a certain clerical gentleman, was instrumental in 
committing some copies of it to the flames. An honourable end I 
But Mr. Wiiliston has published a professed reply to that 
book ; and, I am sorry to say, he has manifested less impartiali- 
ty in tlie statement of our doctrines, and in Lis manner of de- 
fending his own, than he djd in his sermons. To correct his 



IV I'REFACE. 

erroneous statements, to defend the truth ag-ainst the onsets of 
error, and to detect the fallacy of his arguments, with a view to 
promote the honour and glory of God, whose sacred cliaracter 
appears so completely shrouded in darkness hy the sentiments 
of our antagonists, have been the leading objects which have 
drawn forth the following work. It is hoped that the like inac- 
curracies, which, notwithstanding all the care that was taken, 
appeared in the former publication, may be avoided in this. 

But, being more and more convinced of a liability to mistake, 
the reader's indulgence is begged for any he may discover, and 
he is requested to let them find an apology in that common frailty 
x>f human nsitiire, the fallibility of human judgment. But while 
mercy is asked for the manner in which the present work is ex- 
ecuted, none is sought for the doctrines stated and illustrated. 
Iftheycanbe slain by scriptural and rational argument, let 
them die under its lacerating strokes. The reputation of an 
obscure individual, or the character of any particular sect, how- 
ever numerous and respectable, are considerations of small im- 
portance, when compared to the developement, and the perma^ 
Dent establishment of the tremendous truths of God. With a 
direct view to promote experimental and practical godliness, 
these truths should be the stf^reme object of every man's pur- 
suit. If any inferior object had induced the author to intrude 
himself upon the public attention, and especially to disturb 
the tranquihzing waters of the Christian world at the present 
time, with the pen of controversy, he would merit the severest 
censure. 

It may, however, be objected, that the prevailing disposition 
among the several orders of professing Christians to unite in 
thegrand work of spreading the gospel, ought to preclude all 
controversies of this kind. So far, indeed, as this disposition is 
founded in Divine love and Christian harmony^ it should be cher- 
ished by every possible medtis. Were the several denomina- 
tions of Christians, to agree in laying aside, in respect to con- 
tending for them, each their peculiarities, and unite in recom- 
mending to the lost world the grand fundamentals of Christian- 
ity, it would be a most desirable event. But the time has not 
yet arrived for such a union to take place ; although it is ap- 
parent that much of that bigotted claim to exclusive disciple- 
ship is declining. The mere accession, however, of nominal 



PREFACE. V 

converts (o the Christian cause, only tends to diminish the pe- 
culiar glories of the Christian character. But can our antag- 
onists, who cordially approve of Mr. W's book, in which he 
stigmatizes us with the opprobrious epithet of Satari's ministersy 
be sincerely desirous of uniting with us ? Do they want to range 
under the banners of Christ, the minions of the black prince 
of darkness ! Let none talk of union with us, who reiterate this 
smoky calumny with so much Christian gravity. 

Or do they expect us to submit in silence, while they are 
flaying us alive with such unmerciful strokes ? However grati- 
fying it might be to them to have the undisturbed privilege of 
assailing us in this rude manner, calling us 'The seed of the 
serpent spitting out all our venom,'* let them not mock us by 
pretending it is to persuade us to union. AV'e are not to be thus 
cajoled out of our religious principles. Does one dominant par- 
ty vociferate uniori ! for the purpose of making all others sub- 
servient to its monopolizing designs ? It is devoutly to be wish- 
ed that none are actuated by such unworthy motives. 

Deprecating this evil, as one of the worst of human evils, it 
maj' be observed, that, so far as a true gospel union is sought, 
the present author would be the last to put the smallest bar- 
rier in the way of its attainment. Let those who so loudly 
plead for union, come forward in the spirit of brotherly love, 
and, by sacrificing \.\\e\T peculiar sentiments, agree with their 
brethren in preacliing tlie grand fundamental doctrines of the 
gospel; and the author, for one, promises to meet them upon 
this ground, and to unite in extending the influence of divine 
truth. 

Until the period arrives for such a union to take place, we 
must be permitted to defend ourselves against the invasive as- 
saults of our theological adversaries; feeling perfectly satisfied 
that our doctrines should be tested by the closest investigation. 
Though diffident cf cur own strength, yet we are so confident 
that we have truth on our side, that we doubt not but it will 
support and defend us. 

Under this impression the following pages have been written. 
To answer every objection which may have been raised, was 
impossible without extending the work too far. The principal 
features, however, of Mr. Williston's doctrine, and the princi- 

*See the Rev. JUr. Sj)ring''s sermon on Elution, p, 39. 
A 2 



VI PREFACE. 

pal arguments employed in its defence have been considered* 
It is probable that some of the strictures may seem severe. 
They appear so, indeed, to the author ; but he knew not how 
to avoid them. Some of Mr. W's. assertions were apparently 
so opposite to truth, that it was found extremely difficult to reply 
to them, and still preserve the appearance of christian meek- 
ness and moderation. The author has however, chosen the 
softest terms he could to convey his meaniag. If he has been 
betrayed into the use of any which the occasion cannot justify, 
he humbly asks pardon of God, and of all good men. May God 
send his blessing with this imperfect attempt to illustrate and 

defend His sacred truth. 

N. BANGS. 

J^eio-YorJc, July2CtIu 1818. 



N. B. That the reader might readily distinguish between 
quotations from Mr. W.'s book, and those from other authors, 
the latter are distinguished by single^ and the former by dmdtle 
commas. 



INTRODUCTION. 

It may be necessary to inform the reader, 
that in the year 1810, while travelling on the 
Albany circuit, circumstances occured which 
induced the author to engage in a public de- 
bate with the Rev. Mr. Benedict, Presbyterian 
minister in Franklin, Delaware County, on the 
points of doctrine now under consideration. 
This debate was conducted in the Presbyte- 
rian meeting-house, in Durham, of which con- 
gregation Mr. Seth Williston is the officiating 
minister. Being present at the debate, and 
doubtless feeling a lively interest in its final 
result, he afterwards published his volume of 
Sermons, in which he attempted a vindica- 
tion of the peculiar doctrines of Calvinism and 
Hopkinsianism ; in doing which he also at- 
tempted a refutation of some of the doctrines 
taught by the Methodists. Viewing some of 
the sentiments of Mr. Williston, not only erro- 
neous in themselves, but as having a pernicious 
tendency ; and also conceiving our doctrines not 
fairly exhibited by Mr. W. I felt myself under 
obligation to attempt a detection of what was 
considered heterodox in his sermons ; and for 
the sake of giving the public a just perception 
©f our sentiments, to rectify some of his mis- 



Vlll INTRODUCTION. 

takes. This was done in six letters address- 
ed to that gentleman, entitled the " Errors of 
Hopkinsianism detected and refuted." He 
has published a reply to my book, which he 
calls a "Vindication of some of the most essen- 
tial doctrines of the reformation." As he has 
produced some scriptures which were not be- 
fore noticed, and advanced some arguments, 
not before considered; and as the subjects ap- 
pear very important in themselves, taking 
them all into the account ; it is thought neces- 
sary for the vindication of the truth to attempt 
a second refutation of the errors of Hopkin- 
sianism. 



THE 



MEFOMMER MEFOEMEPa 



CHAPTER L 

On universal divine agency and efficiency. 

JVIr. Williston's first section is entitled, "A 
vindication of the doctrine of divine decrees; be- 
ing a reply to objections raised against this doc- 
trine in Mr. Bangs' first letter." This title has a 
very imposing aspect. His readers must certainly 
infer that we deny the doctrine of divine decrees, 
whereas we as fully believe them, as he can. Per- 
ha})s, however, this title was only designed to pre- 
engage the reader in favour of the arguments which 
were to follow. But the question between us is, 
What are divine decrees ? He maintains that they 
comprehend every thing that ever did, or ever will 
lake place, in heaven, earth, or hell : that all those 
things are not only decreed, and are according to 
God's will and pleasure, but are actually brought 
into existence by God him&elf. This proposition 
we deny. And that the reader msy be able to de- 
cide on which side of the question the truth lies, 
1 shall endeavour, 

1. To explain those scriptures which are gene- 
rally brought in su))port of that proposition. 

2. To reply to some of Mr. Williston's arguments 
with which he has attempted its vindication. 

3. To attempt its refutation by scripture and ra- 
tional argument. But O my God, who is sufficient 
for these things ! Touch thou my heart with celes-^ 



10 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

tial fire, that it may glow with an ardent love for 
the truth. Enlighten thou my understanding, that 
to the " height of this great argument, I may assert 
a gracious providence, and justify the ways of God 
to man." May the irradiating beams .of eternal 
truth so shine into my soul that, loosing sight of 
self, and my antagonist as a man, 1 may perceive 
the superlative excellence <?f divine truth, and fol- 
low its attractive charms wiiferever it may lead. 

1. And first, let us attend to those passages of 
scripture which have been adduced to prove that 
God excites man to moral evil. That we may have a 
clear understanding of them, it is important to notice 
the relation in which God is represented as standing 
to man. He is not only represented in the character 
of Creator, Legislator, Governor and Father, but al- 
so as a Judge, and as being in some sense the exe- 
cutor of his own decrees.* This is especially the 
case in respect to his conduct towards nations, and 
the nation of Israel in particular. As they had 
been selected from the other nations of the world to 
be his covenant people, he is represented as presid- 
ing over them as their Governor, and as ruling over 
them as their King, and as deciding upon their mor- 
al conduct as their Judge, But this sovereign au<^ 
thority was not restricted to the Israelites. As na- 
tions cannot be judged, rewarded and punished in 

* By the decrees of Ood in this connexion, we understand his 
just and immutable purpose in so overruling' the conduct of his 
obedient and disobedient people, by limiting", restraining-, .and 
directing- its final result, so far as is consistent with man's free- 
dom and responsibility, as to make it serve for the develope- 
ment of his own most glorious character, and the good of those 
who love him. So far as our opponents in this controversy, 
contend for the operation of divine decrees in thus overruling 
mankind, even the designs and dispositions of the wicked, we 
entirely agree with them : but when they insist, as Mr. W. has 
done, that God works efficiently upon the human heart for the 
production of evil desires, wicked designs, and furnishes men 
with means to execute their nefarious purposes, we beg leave 
to dissent from them, for the reasons assigned in this chapter. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 11 

the future world in their national capacity, God ex- 
ercises his executive authority over them in this 
world ; using for this purpose one wicked nation 
as an instrument of his vengeance upon another. 
But how strange would it be, to infer from these 
facts, that God by^fdrcc of his decree, made these 
people wicked, that he might have an opportunity 
of displaying his sovreignty in their punishment. 
This erroneous representation of the divine charac- 
ter and conduct, is exposed in my first letter to 
Mr. W. p. 19. 

Considering God in his executive capacity, as 
deciding upon the character and conduct of nations, 
and as executing upon Them his own decrees as a 
punishment for their wickedness, we may have an 
easy and rational interpretation of those scriptures 
which speak of his employing them as instruments 
of his holy indignation against those nations which 
had provoked him to anger by their unnecessirated 
rebellions. ' But Sihon, king of Heshbon, would not 
let us pass by him ; for the Lord thy God hardened 
his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might 
deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.' 
Deut. ii. 30. It is apparent from a parallel narra- 
tive of this event in Numb. xxi. 21 — 30. that the 
reason why the Lord hardened the spirit of that 
king was, on account of his former wickedness ; for 
which God now designed to destroy him by the in- 
strumentality of the Israelites, who acted, in this in- 
stance, as the scourge of God, We may also be- 
hold in this transaction, a just reaction of divine 
providence, in thus punishing this wicked prince, 
who had, at a former period, made unjust depreda- 
tions upon a neighbouring nation, the Moabites, 
and dispossessed them of their cities and lands : 
and now, to punish him for his predatory warfare, 
Sihon is dispossessed of his cities and lands by the 
Israelites. An awful lesson to those proud and 



12 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

haughty nations, whose venality prompts them to 
plunder others, merely because they have power 
to do so. In the same way, and for the same rea- 
sons, did God commission Joshua to exterminate 
the devoted nations who inhabited the land of Ca- 
naan, The cup of their iniquities was now full, the 
whole land was polluted by their abominations, and 
therefore God determined to purify the land, by 
destroying its wicked inhabitants by fire and sword. 
But what a dark shade would be cast upon the 
character of the Holi/ One of Israel, to infer from 
these circumstances, that he first decreed, and then 
excited by his own agency those nations to com- 
mit all their abominations ; and that these abomina- 
tions were perfectly pleasing to him ; and that he 
nevertheless punished them in this exemplary man- 
ner, for having fulfilled his decree, and for having 
done his pleasure ! Similar conduct manifesting it- 
self in any man would stamp his character with 
everlasting infamy. First make them sinful ; and 
then punish them for being so ! Alas, that ever such 
a representation should have been given of God's 
most sacred, just and merciful character. It is 
enough to make one's blood chill even to think of 
it. Deliberately to assert it, and gravely to at- 
tempt to prove it, appears to us, to the last degree 
shocking and blasphemous. 

* O Assyrian, the rod of mine anger, and the 
staff in their hand is mine indignation. I will send 
him against an hypocritical nation, and against the 
people of my wrath will I give him a charge, to take 
the spoil, and to take the prey, and to tread (hem 
down like the mire of the streets. Hovvbeit, he 
meaneth not so ; neither doth his heart think so ; 
but it is in his heart to destroy and cut off nations 
not a few.' Isa. x. 5 — 7. In this instance also, 
the Lord manifests his character as a righteous 
King, who is about to execute his indignation upon 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 18 

the hypocritical nation of Israel ; and finding the 
Assyrian monarch a fit instrument to execute his 
purpose, he uses him for that end. Hence in ver. 
15. he is compared to the axe and saff in the hands 
of the carpenter, whom God used to hew and sever 
the Israehtes for their wickedness against him. — 
But in what a contemptible light would he appear, 
were we to suppose that he decreed and excited the 
Israelites to their hypocrisy and also the Assyrian 
to his wickedness ; and then sent the latter to pun- 
ish the former for their sins ! Let those believe this 
who can. 

Mr. Williston has a good remark upon this cir- 
cumstance, were it not that it contradicts his lead- 
ing principle, it would answer him a good purpose. 
" The action of going to Jerusalem to do mischief, 
and to seek plunder, was exclusively the action of 
this ambitious monarch ; but his going there as a 
rod is ascribed to the God of Israel." p. 32. This 
certainly is a necessary distinction. But how does 
it coincide with his doctrine ? This text he brings 
to prove thai all things are brought about by God's 
asjency : and if all thijigs are brought to pass by 
his agency, were not the action and motive of going 
to Jerusalem to do mischief and to seek plunder, 
included among the all things ? Or were this mo- 
tive and this action, yw thing? no event, no effect? 
If Mr. Wiiliston's doctrine be true, the design and 
action of the Assyrian monarch, were as much de- 
creed, and as much according to God's pleasure, 
as was his going ihere as his rod^ the staff of his 
indignalion. If, however, Mr. W. design to make 
this exception, he thereby gives up his doctrine of 
universal divine agency ar-.a efficiency. 

Now, if the motive and disroi«ition of this king 
were decreed, and brought into existence and ope- 
ration by the exciting agency of God, how could he 
have been any more responsible for ihemj than the 

B 



14 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

axe or saw in the hands of the carpenter ? These 
are the insuperable difficulties attendant on Mr. 
Williston's principle of interpretation : all which 
are completely obviated by admitting that this king, 
by an abuse of his moral power, uninfluenced to do 
it by divine agency, made himself wicked ; and that 
the people of Israel also, abusing their high privi- 
leges unnecessarily, had merited this chastisement ; 
to inflict which God now employed the Assyrian 
monarch, as a scourge in his holy hand ; and then, 
to punish him for his wilful and unnecessary wick- 
edness, for his lofty pretentions, the Lord 0/ hosts 
shall stir up a scourge for him according to the 
strength of Midian at the rock of Oreh, See Isa. x. 
5 — 24. This view of the subject exhibits a right- 
eous King in the Lord of hosts, setting in judgment 
on these two hypocritical nations, passing sentence 
of condemnation upon them for their evil conduct, 
and finally executing his just decision by such 
means as his infinite wisdom and goodness saw fit 
to employ for that purpose. 

That text in Rev. xvii. 17. 'For God hath put 
it into tiieir hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, 
and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the 
words of God be fulfilled,' admits of a similar inter- 
pretation. It is no part of the present enquiry, 
who is meant by the beast. It is more important, 
to remark, for the vindication of God's sacred hon- 
or, that these kingdoms, having become wicked by 
an abuse of their free moral agency, to punish them 
for it, God put it into their hearts, to givt their king- 
dom to the beast to fulfil his will. When nations 
become opulent and proud, they generally become 
luxurious ; this paves the way for effeminacy, which 
renders them, not only objects of divine indignation 
on account of their accumulated guilt, but also an 
easy prey to their enemies : and now having for- 
feited the protection of God by their wickedness 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 15 

• 

and falling into the hands of their enemies ; the 
Lord is said to deliver them up, and to employ 
their depredating enemies as the rod of his indig- 
nation to punish a disobedient and gainsaying peO' 
pie. 

In all these, and many more similar instances in 
which God is represented as hardening the hearts 
of kings, and as using them as instruments of his 
indignation, we may behold a righteous sovereign, 
exemplifying his distributive justice in the punish- 
ment of nations, (and also those individuals whose 
elevated stations in society rendered it necessary 
to punish them in this exemplary manner,) for their 
wilful aberrations from the laws of eternal truth 
and righteousness. A human judge, acting in his 
official capacity, pronounces sentence of death up- 
on a murderer ; and the law orders him executed 
by some person appointed for that purpose : This 
is a righteous act ; and it is in no sense inconsist- 
ent with that law which enjoins us to love our 
Reighbour as ourselves. But to say that this judge, 
(supposing him to have had power to do so) forced 
this man to murder by a decree or otherwise ; and 
then punished him for so doing, would be the foul- 
est impeachment of his character. And it would 
be equally ungenerous to say, he influenced the 
man to comm.ii the horrid sin of murder, merely be- 
cause he executed the law upon the murderer. So 
it is altogether improper to say that the Judge of 
all the earth, excited and influenced those wicked 
nations to be guilty of moral evil, merely because 
he. exercised his judicial authority upon them, for 
being so. God will finally sit in judgment upon the 
incorrigibly wicked, and consign them to the region 
of eternal misery, for having abused their distin- 
guished privileges ; but must we infer from this 
fact, that he foreordained that they should be wick- 
cdy and that he, by his own agency, influenced them 



26 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

to sin, that he might have an opportunity of punish- 
ing them with hell fire ? The thought is too shock- 
ing to be indulged for a moment. But we might, 
with as much propriety, infer this, as to conclude 
that because God in some instances has judicially 
hardened wicked monarchs, and employed them as 
ministers of his righteous vengeance upon others, 
who made themselves objects of his displeasure by 
their reiterated crimes, that he also influenced them 
to commit those crimes. If the reader will make 
use of the above principle, he will, it is believed, 
have a key that will open all the locks which cal- 
vinistic decrees have invented, to shut up the wards 
which guard the temple of truth. He may then 
pass safely along, without being frightened with the 
view of a being who has bolted all the doors of 
mercy against Hopkinsian reprobates, by the po- 
lished steel of Si moral inability: and who threat- 
ens them with everlasting destruction for not doing 
an impossibility. 

The principle of interpretation above laid down 
will obviate the difficulty suggested by Mr. Willis- 
ton r^pecting what he calls my concession, in ad- 
mitting that God sends the sword, to punish cities 
and kingdoms devoted, in consequence of their 
wickedness, to destruction. Upon this he observes, 
p. 44, " I also conclude, that if it does not appear 
inconsistent that God should send a man to break 
his commandments, (as the wicked Sennacherib 
evidently did) it will not appear inconsistent that 
he should purpose to send him." Here, and in- 
deed in all he has said in this and the following 
page to reconcile his doctrine, which asserts that 
the purposes and commands of God are opposed 
to each other, and to common sense, he takes for 
granted, that when God uses one wicked nation to 
punish another wicked nation, that he sends them 
to break his commandments. But when a murder- 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 17 

er is executed, is the law violated ? Does the man 
who executes its penalty, violate, by that act, its 
jjrecepts ? Nay, does not the judge who pronoun- 
ces sentence, and the man who sees it executed, 
obey the law as muf h as those who avoid murder ? 
And if they refused to decide and execute, would 
not they themselves be as much viobtcrs of law, as 
the man who commits murder ? God's righteous 
law passes sentence of condemnation upon those 
who violate its precepts ; and, as before observed, 
as nations cannot consistently be judged in a future 
state, in (heir national capacity, God is represent- 
ed as sitting in judgujcnt on them in this world: 
and, in the execution of his righteous sentence, he 
employs those agents, whom he seeih fit to choose ; 
but in executing this righteous decision, do they 
violate God's commands ? or, does he send them 
to break his commandments ? Certainly not. His 
command is. He that sheddeth mail's bloody by man 
shall his blood be shed, Gen. ix. 6. His commands, 
or his revealed will, require that those nations who 
hsive Jilled up the measure of their iniquities, should 
be destroyed ; and the instruments of his justice^ 
who are sent to excc»ite his righteous decrees upon 
such devoted nations, are executing his command^ 
meats; that is, they are, in obedience to the im- 
mutable law of heaven's high couit of justice, ful- 
filling the unalterable counsel of God : for so runs 
this counsel — ' Those mine enemie«, who would 
not that 1 should reign over them, bring hither, and 
slay them before me.' There is then no kind of 
opposition between this counsel of eternal wisdom 
and justice, and God's commandments, which re- 
quire us to love one another. Are we to suppose 
that those angels, who, in the final day of decision, 
execute the righteous sentence of the judge of ail 
the earth, by so doing "break the commandments 
of God ? Neither do those ministers of God's iaflex- 

B 2 



1-8 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

ible justice, who are sent to punish nations justly 
devoted to destruction for their wickedness, break 
his commandments. They are executing their aw- 
ful penahy, in obedience to God's revealed de- 
crees. What a tottering system must that be, 
which forces its advocates, in attempting its vindi- 
cation, to set the decrees cindcom7nands, the purposes 
and will of God at variance ! Which represents God 
.as decreeing, SLiid bringing to pass what he has /br- 
hidden, and prohibited by an express command* 
We sincerely pity the.raan, who, to defend his doc- 
trine, is driven to such a desperate assault upon the 
consistency of God's sacred character and govern- 
ment. 

From p. 37 — 48 of my book, I undertook so to 
explain those passages of sacred scripture which 
speak of the crucifixion of Christ, as to make them 
harmonize with the uniform design of revelation,' 
which is to vindicate God from being the author of 
sin : and also to rescue them from the improper ser- 
vice into which they have been pressed, when em- 
ployed to prove that God decreed, and, by his own 
agency, influenced the Jews in their inhuman and 
murderous conduct towards our divine Saviour. 

Mr. Williston has professed to reply to my argu- 
ments on that subject. 1 do not wish to repeat what 
has been already said, and therefore refer the read- 
er to the abovementioned pages of my book, and to 
what Mr. W. has said in reply. See p. p. 12, 13, 
14, 15, 16. of his book. It is proper, however, to 
remark, that he has taken an easy leap over the 
strength of my arguments upon that subject, and 
left the most pointed scriptures untouched.* So 

* In respect to Luke xxii. 22. Mr. W. has noticed the error in 
the criticism on the Greek word n^icrjusvoy. But although that 
pavticiple is in the passive voice, preterite, it by no means 
affects the argument in favour of refering the determination 
there spokeo of to Judas and the Sanhedrim ; for we may read 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 19 

far therefore, 1 consider the arguments good, and 
unanswerable. 

it tlius, Trtdy the Son qfJiJangoeth as it haih been determined. 
While therefore I acknowledge an unintentional mistake, (and 
which was discovered verj^soon after my book was printed, but 
too late to correct it,) 1 still think there is no necessity ofsup- 
posing- the deterviinei^m that particular case, was God. The 
whole context forbids such a conclusion. 

In reg-ard to Acts iv. 27, 28. I am fully convinced that the 
translation given of that text in my book is correct. That we 
ai e not alone in this sentiment, is evident from the following 
French translation: — Car en effet H6rode et Ponce Pilate, 
avec les Gentils et le peuple d'lsrael, se sont assembles contre 
ton saint Fils Jesus, que lu as oint, Pour fair toutes les choses 
que ta main et ton conseil avoient auparavant determine devoir 
dtre faites ; of which the following is an accurate translation — 
For in effect (or in truth) HeroJ and Pontjus Piiate, with the 
Gentiles and the people of Israel, assembled themselves against 
thy holy Son Jesus, whom thou hast auointed, To do the things 
which thy hand and counsel had before determined should be 
done. Here the nominative to the verb to do is Thy Holy Son 
Jesus — who was anointed of God the Father to do all the things, 
the miracles and works which he performed. See the French 
Bible, printed by the JVewVork Bible Society. W hen 1 quoted 
the French version of Acts xiii. 43. 1 did not think it necessa- 
ry (o inform my readers "that the New Testament was not 
first written in the French language," because 1 did not sup- 
pose any one believed it was : Mr. VV. however, has done this 
for me ; and therefore it is needless to remind the revider that 
the above quotation in French dress is not designed for the ori- 
ginal : it is only intended to slicw that we are not singular in 
contending for that translation of the original Greek. Those 
who understand French will do me the justice to acknowledge, 
that I have not misrepresented that version of the text. 

Mr. W. indeed says, in support of his application of this texty 
that in the second Psalm, from which the Apostle quoted, " it 
is foretold what would be done to or against Jesus, and not 
what he would ^jwi-r//' rfo." That he is under a mistake will 
be evident to all who con? ull and compare the passage*-. After 
predicting what the xcic/ced would do Ui^imit Christ, the Lord's 
anoifited, ver. t — 3. the inspired Psa'raist then foretels what 
the Ltord himself would do — ' He that sittcth in the heavens 
shall laugh : the Lord shall have them in derision — Yet have I 
set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. J will declare the de- 
cree : the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son ; this day 
have I begotten thee,' &:c. Here then is a plain prediction of 
what Christ himself would do. And did he not, in spite of all 
their malice, baffle all their designs, and confound all their ma- 
chinations, by stretching forth his hand to heal^ and by that re- 
snarkahic effusion of the Holy Ghosty with which his apostles 
were filled ? Acts iv. 30, 3 1 . 



20 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

But, as he has quoted some additional texts to 
prove his point, accompanied with some remarks, 
it seems necessary to notice them. In the first 
place he adduces the parallel texts to Luke xxii. 22. 
in Math. xxvi. 24. Mark xiv. 21. and John xiii. 18. 
Matthew and Mark say, * The Son of Man goeth 
as it is written of him ; but woetmto that man by 
whom the Son of Man is betrayed ! it had been 
good for that man, if he had not been born.' Upon 
this he observes, ^' By comparing all the evange- 
lists, we learn this important truth, that whatever 
thing was written in the word of God, as certainly 
future, was also determined?'^ p. 12. Let us see if 
this conclusion necessarily follows from the words 
of the Evangelists. They say, the Son of Man 
goeth as it is written of him, &;c. Is the word 
written o( synonymous import "wkh determined /* I 
believe it will be extremely difficult to prove, either 
that the word comes from the same root, or is used 
in the same sense by the inspired writers. The 
things WRITTEN respecting Judas and his wicked 
associates in this traitorous and murderous trans- 
action, may be found in Psalms xlii. 9. and xxii. 
In the first mentioned text, the prophetic Spirit thus 
described Judas; 'Yea, mine own familiar friend, 
in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath 
lifted up his heel against rne.' Now, there is not 
one word said, nor is it even suggested, in either of 
the places referred to, that God had pre-determin- 
ed to create Judas and influence him, by his ov/n 
agency, to betray Christ. But the prophecies 
which went before concerning Judas were written ; 
and to those written predictions, which are a proof 
of divine prescience, the Evangelists refer, not to 
prove the divine determinations and exciting agen- 
cy of God in the production of moral evil ; but to 
shew ihat the character so long foretold as the be- 
trayer of Jesus Christ, was then disclosed in Judas j 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 21 

who, in conjunction with the Jewish Sanhedrim, 
had formed the nefarious determination to betray 
Christ into the hands of his enemies. St. Luke 
speaks of this determination, which had now result- 
ed from the collusive consultation of the chief priesli 
and Judas : Matthew, Mark, and John refer to the 
written predictions respecting these things, as a 
confirmation of their trittb, and of the true charac- 
ter of Jesus of Nazareth, it being identified to its 
description in the prophetic scriptures. St. John 
says, ' That the scriptures may be fulfilled, He 
that eateth bread with me, hath lifted up his heel 
against me.' If this Evangelist had believed 
that the traitorous conduct of Judas was eft'ected 
by the present exciting agency of God, resulting 
from a divine pre-determination, why did he not 
say. That the determination might be fulfilled, in- 
stead of saying, That the scriptures may be fulfill- 
ed ? If he had used that language, would not Mr, 
Willi^.lon have thought his doctrine firmly establish- 
ed ? So, we think ours undeniably established, be- 
cause St. John has said, That the scriptures may be 
fulfilled ; that is, the scriptures are fulfJled in the 
person and conduct of Judas, which is an addition- 
al evidence that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised 
Messiah. The silence of the three Evangelists, 
and of the Psalms from which they quote, in regard 
to the predetermining purpose of God in reference 
to this event, and the manifest allusion of St. Luke 
to the determination of Judas and the chief priests, 
atlbrd no contemptible proof, that no such determir 
nation as Mr. W. has supposed ever existed. 

That the determination spoken of is not refer* 
able to God, is, I think manifest from the consider- 
ation, that our Lord pronounced a woe upon the 
agent, by whom the Son of Man was betrayed. If 
all things which were written respecting future 
events, prove that such events were determined^ as 



22 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

Mr. W. affirms, why was this woe pronounced upon 
Judas? Must this unfoitunate man have been sent 
to hell, and suifer never-ending torments for having 
been the necessary instrument of the redemption of 
the worJd ? For, if Christ could not have died with- 
out the traitorous conduct of Judas, as Mr. W. sup- 
poses, then the redemption of the world depended, 
in part upon that treachery^, it having been decreed 
and made necessary by the counsel of eternal wis- 
dom. How deplorable the condition of the repro- 
bates, to be doomed to hell for doing so much to- 
wards effecting the redemption of the elect ! Mere 
passive and necessary agents, exactly fulfilling the 
secret will and counsel of God, in every respect 
answering the end for which they were born, and 
then sentenced to eternal fire for doing what they 
could no more have avoided than the immutable 
determination of God could be changed. Let those 
believe this who can believe that God is unjust and 
cruel. It is believed, that no man can reconcile 
such conduct with any of the divine perfections, 
not even his inflexible justice. And this is the 
point, I wish the reader to keep in mind ; for Mr. 
W. seems to bring it into view with apparent reluc- 
tance, shrinking from it, as if he were conscious it 
could not bear the light. 

The -following texts are quoted by Mr. W. to 
prove that all the wicked conduct of his enemies 
was necessary to effect Christ's death ; ' Being put to 
death in the flesh.' 1 Pet. iii. 18. 'His life was tak- 
en from the earth.' ' Ye have taken and by wicked 
hands have crucified and slain,' Acts ii. 23 ; and 
chap. iii. ' and killed the prince of life.' From 
his manner of introducing and applying these texts, 
his readers might infer that we did not believe that 
Christ was crucified and slain. Where is this fact 
denied? ' It is not contended that Christ was not 
crucified ; but that crucifixion was not the imme» 



AGENCY AJN'D EFFICIENCT. 23 

diate cawse of his death. And the wilful diud treach* 
erous conduct of Judas, and the horrid and unneces- 
sitated rebellion of the Jews, made it necessary, so 
far as such human and wicked agents can make any 
thing necessary, * for Jesus to be crucified/ Let. 
i. p. 47. The truth contended for in that letter is, 
that the traitorous and murderous conduct of Judas 
and others, was not made necessary by an eternal 
decree of God, nor effected by his present exciting 
agency : and though they actually took him, nailed 
him to the cross, and in this sense killed him, if he 
had not voluntarily resigned himself to their will, 
they could not have deprived him of his life. To 
deny this, is, we conceive, to degrade the Son of 
God to a mere creature, who would if it had been 
in his power, have extricated himself from their 
hands ; but that they had such absolute control 
over him, that they forced his life from him by the 
barbarous method of crucifixion, contrary to his 
will. But as such an idea would be deroga- 
tory to the high character of the Saviour of the 
world, it seems, I think, more consistent to adhere 
to his own account of the cause of his death, than 
to any forced construction of the above passages 
of scripture. * Because / lat/ down my life that I 
might take it again. No man taketh it from me, 
but I lay it down of myself: 1 have power to lay it 
down, and I have power to take it again.' John x. 
17, 18. 

No words can be more express, and more direct 
to the point than these. No man, says he, taketh 
it from me. Unless we palpably contradict the 
Son of God himself, we must understand those quo- 
tations from St. Peter as relating only to the facts, 
that his enemies, actuated by a murderous disposi- 
tion, took the Saviour of the world, nailed him to 
the cross, and crucified him ; he having voluntari- 
ly submitted himself into their hands. But this 



24 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

voluntary submission, was an act of love towards 
the human family, without which his death could 
not have been effected ; for, being God as well as 
man, he could have resisted all their assaults, and 
have delivered himself from all their malice. The 
murder of the Son of God is justly charged upon 
them by the Apostle. He that hateth his brother is 
a murderer. And they hated him without any just 
cause, dispised him as an impostor, and exerted 
their murderous disposition as far as they could, 
following him with their bitter revilings, even to the 
last extremity of his tremendous sufferings, until 
he bowed his head and gave up the ghost. There- 
fore, it was very proper, when the Apostle, as the 
minister of God, was setting forth the heinousness 
of their sin, that they might be penetrated with a 
sense of the enormity of their crimes, to bring into 
view this daring, insulting, and murderous conduct 
towards the immaculate Saviour. But, let no man 
presume to contradict the words of Truth itself, 
who said, J^o man taketh my life from me. 

It will be much safer for us to confess our igno- 
rance of the precise meaning of St. Peter, than to 
give such a sense to his words as would make him 
contradict his Master, and as would represent the 
Almighty Saviour, merely as a passive agent in 
the wondrous act of redeeming the v/orld ; as would 
strip him of his peculiar glory as God-man, having 
an unlimited control over all things. But Mr. W. 
thinks, that the above words of the Apostles only 
convey an '' idea of the passivity of his death." p. 
16. and believes it improper to suppose, that the 
death of Christ was miraculous. But if it were not 
miraculous, it was brought about by an ordinary 
operation of the laws of nature, in the same way 
that the malefactors died, who were crucified with 
him. Pray tell us then, where is the merit of his 
death? Whati All these phenomena in the natural 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. ^ 

world ; the sun darkened ! the rocks rending ! the 
dead arising ! the centurion trembling ! and above 
all, the Son of God groaning under the mighty load 
of human guilt, the curse of the Adamic law — the 
sword of eternal justice, peircing the vital strings 
of IiK°? while the soldier's spear penetrated his 
body ! r^othing miraculous in all this ? All this ac- 
cording to .the common course of nature ? How 
does this doctn'iie sink the grand dignity of the Son 
of God! and deprive his voluntaij submission to 
the death of the cross of that infinite merit which 
it actually possessedc That (he reader may be 
able to form an estimate of the merits (./ this 
important question, he is referred to p. 39— ^^3 
of the Errors of Hopkinsianism, and to Mr. War 
Vindication, from p. 12 — 16. 

To prove the passixity of Christ's death, and 
to shew that it depended upon the nicked conduct 
of his enemies, as the instruments of God's justice, 
Mr. W. quotes the following texts • * Yet it pleas- 
ed the Lord to bruise him.' * Awake, O sword, 
against my shepherd, and againj^t the man that 
is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts : smite the 
Shepherd.' Zach. xiii. 7. And to prove that the 
wicked are God's sword, he quotes Psalm xvii. 13, 
14. ' Deliver my soul from the wicked, which is 
thy sword: from men which are thy hand.' But 
do these texts prove that Christ died only in con- 
sequence of the barbarous treatment of his ene- 
mies ? Or did he supjiose that we denied that God, 
as the righteous governor of the moral world, over- 
ruled the malicious dispositions of the Jews, who 
were, in this instance, the sword of God in his 
hands ? If he had attended with impartiality to my 
remarks upon this subject, he might have saved 
himself the trouble of quoting these texts : for, it 
is no point of controversy between us, whether 
Christ was crucified with wicked hands. But only, 

c 



26 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

whether all those wicked hands which were lifted 
against Christ, were guided and directed by the 
hand of God in ail they did ; and whether all this 
was so essentially necessary, that Christ could not 
have died without it. The fact that John the Bap- 
tist was put to death by an order from Herod, is 
not disputed ; but was that cruel order so necessa- 
ry to effect the death of that holy roan, that he 
could not have died without it? In regard to the 
fact itself, that Christ was crucified by wicked 
hands, it is not disputed ; but was this conduct so 
necessary, that he could not have died without it? 
If Mr. Williston could substantiate his main 
proposition, that God's decree, and his exciting 
agency to bring that decree into effect, lays a 
necessity/ on all events that ever did, or ever will 
take place, then he would prove that the treachery 
of Judas, and all the hypocritical conduct of the 
Jews, were necessary to effect the reden:\ption of 
the world by the death of Christ. But, ' Ought not 
Christ to have suffered these things, and to have 
entered into his glory' ? Undoubtedly ; for ' It be- 
came him for whom are all things, and by whom 
are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to 
make the captain of their salvation perfect through 
sufferings,' Heb. ii. 10. It became him, not to re- 
sist, but voluntarily to submit to the cruel treat- 
ment of his enemies, to yield his innocent back to 
their scourging, his face to their smiting, his head 
to be crowned with a crown of thorns, his hands 
and feet to be nailed to the cross, and finally to 
yield up his life as a sacrifice for sinners. It would 
have been unbecoming his character, as Mediator 
between God and man, to have escaped from these 
sufferings : hence it is asked, * Ought not Christ 
to have suffered these things ?' So it may be said 
of Christians when persecuted by their enemies ; 
Ought they not to bear it with meekness and pa- 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 27 

tience ? And, if the wickedness of their enemies 
prompts them to persecute them even to death, (hey 
ought to bow wilh submisrion to these suiTerings, 
glorifying God in death. But does it follow from 
these concessions, that all that persecuting conduct 
was made necessary by God's decree ? I think not. 
But all those sufferings which originated merely 
from wicked men, would not have deprived Christ 
of his life, unless he had also voluntarily submitted 
to the penalty of the Adamic law, which was death. 
The anterior and moving cause of Christ's death, 
was God's love to mankind : God so loved the world 
that he gave his Son: The efficient cause, the in- 
flexible justice of God, manifesting itself on account 
of original transgression: The Lord has laid upon 
him the iniquities of us all : The immediate and 
proximate cause, his own voluntary submission to 
the will of his Father, originating from his (Christ's) 
unbounded love to a lost world : JVho gave himself 
for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity. — 
Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins 
in his own blood. How expressly do these texts 
declare that Christ, not only loved us, but also gave 
himself {ov us ? And how else did he give himself 
for us, than by voluntarily making himself an of- 
fering upon the cross, that he might thereby make 
atonement for the lost world ? For, if he had given 
himself to ever so much reproach and suffering, if 
he had not died^ the work of atonement would have 
been left undone. No, we are not indebted to the 
wickedness of the inhuman Jews, nor to the base 
treachery of Judas, for any part of this grand work 
of redemption. But to the great love ' wherewith 
he loved us, sa as to give himself a ransom for our 
sins,' do we owe the endless debt of gratitude. — 
And, instead of pleading for the necessity of that 
sinful conduct of the crucifiers of Christ, may our 
attention be attracted to the infinite love of Jesus 



28 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

Christ, and our hearts continually employed in as- 
scribing honor and glory (o him who said, ' Lo I 
come to do thy will, O Gnd,^ 

Let us, however, examine this subject a litile far- 
ther. According to the scheme of Mr. W. all the 
wicked and murderous conduct of Christ's enemies 
was made necessary.^ having been immutably fixed 
by an eternal determination of God: of course the 
death of Christ was made necessary by an eternal 
decree of God : but his death would not have been 
necessary, if man had not sinned : from this it un- 
deniably follows that the first sin, and all subse- 
quent sins, were made necessary by an immutable 
and efficacious decree of God. Here then, we are 
brought, as it were unexpectedly, to the antiquated 
doctrine of absolute necessity; and this necessity 
too, originating from an arbitrary act of the divine 
mind. Farther, whatever is necessary^ must be, it 
cannot be avoided. Every thing, therefore, is as 
immovably fixed by the law of invincible necessity, 
as the throne of God itself. Where now is free 
moral agency ? where is mutability and responsi- 
bility ? They are fied from the universe. One 
law, the law of eternal necessity, governs all things 
and beings in heaven, earth and hell. Thus, by 
necessary consequence, does Mr. W. confound 
matter and mind, liberty and necessity, making 
them all equally dependent upon some extraneous 
impulse for all their movements. All are either 
lumps of inactive matter, or bound and necessary 
agents, destined to only one line of conduct, with- 
out the possibility of escape, unless God, by an 
irresistible impulse, turn us about. 

Having noticed the scriptures to which Mr. W, 
appealed in support of his doctrine, we will now 
attend, 

2dly. To his arguments — not all of them — for he 
uses so many that are totally foreign to the point, 
that it would be almost endless to pursue him in all 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 29 

his meanderings. Instead of taking this tedious 
course, my design is to present the reader with 
those which have the most immediate bearing upon 
the disputed question. And let us begin with 
those with which he attempts to vindicate his doc- 
trine from the unholy consequences with which 
I thought it was chargeable. To rescue his doc- 
trine from refering unholiness to God, because it 
declares him to be the efficient cause of sin, he 
observes ; 

" He has not only a counsel about all things, but 
he also worketh all things after that counsel." p. 30. 

*' There is no unholi^ ^Jf^ct while God is consid- 
ered the agent, or efficient cause ; i. e. all his acts 
are holy acts." p. 31. 

Connect these two propositions. 1. "God 
worketh all things after that counsel." This is a 
universal proposition : nothing is excepted in heav- 
en, earth or hell ; among angels, men, or devils. 
3. *' There is no unholy effect while God is con- 
sidered the agent or efficient cause — all his acts 
are holy acts." This is also a universal ])roposi- 
tion — there is no exception ; and it is certain Mr. 
W. did not design to make any exceptions ; for 
these two propositions he has attempted to estab* 
lish by a variety of arguments. Now, if God work 
all things^ and if all his acts are holt/ acts, as Mr. 
W. has asserted, then all unholiness is banished 
from the universe ! This consequence is inevitable. 
It is not in the art or subtilty of man to avoid it. 
Thus has he, by a few strokes of his pen, made 
such a sweeping proposition as to destroy all kinds 
of unholiness from the creation. And if he could 
only do one thing more, he would ease the con- 
sciences of many burdened sinners. If he could 
reconcile his doctrine to matter of fact. If he 
could prove that no such thing as sin existed, he 
will then have proved his first proposition. But 

c 2 



30 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

as the sacred scriptures, and matter of fact, will 
continually be at war with him, by proving beyond 
the possibility of doubt, that unholiness exists, I 
think he will find himself under the necessity of 
abandoning his premises as untrue. If, however, 
he attempt to support them, in spite of all the infal- 
ible testimony against them, it may then be echoed 

from Europe to Asia, from Africa to America, 

* Whatever is, is right.' " God worketh all things; 
and all his acts are holy j" therefore, there are no 
unholy effects — no unrighteousness in the universe. 
Mankind have been deluded into the belief that 
adultery, murder, stealing, &;c. are unholy actions. 
Nay ; but say you, " these are the actions of men :" 
So indeed we always thought, until Mr. Williston had 
informed us, That God worketh all things. This uni- 
versal affirmative proposition, which he supposes 
to be as true as the Bible, has undeceived us, and 
taught us that God worketh all these abominations : 
But what is more surprising still, he asserts that 
they are not abominations, they are all holy acts. 
Reprobates damned — for what ? for not resisting 
the irresistible operation of God, when he worked 
holiness in them ! Christ died for holy sinners ! Do 
not draw back, Sir; it is too late to make excep- 
tions, — unless you recant your Sermons an*d your 
"Vindication. 

Now I ask an}" man, and every man, who has 
not suffered prejudice totally to blind his under- 
Standing, whether such absurd propositions are 
either worthy of belief, or are capable of serious re- 
futation. And as this is the vital part of his system, 
it might now be dismissed as undeserving of further 
notice, were it not that he has used so many me- 
thods to give k a plausible appearance. 

But, take another instance of his manner of 
proving that there is no such thing as sin in the 
world. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 31 

" This is what we mean by the decrees of God, 
namely, The things which he hath purposed in him- 
selp"* — " the purpose which he hath purposed in 
himself, is the rule by which he regulates his own 
conduct.'"' p. 1 1. It is the manifest design of Mr. 
W. to maintain that this purpose comprehends eve- 
ry thing, every cause and effect, every plan, pur- 
pose, will and intention, every secret desire of the 
heart, motion and action in the physical and moral 
world, among angels and saints, sinners and devils. 
He makes no exceptions. It is as universal as 
creation, as unlimited as God's sphere of opera- 
tion. And this purpose, respecting all these things, 
he maintains is according to the secret will of God. 
Hear him propose the second proposition. " Elis 
will is always holy. He has not two characters, 
the one malicious, and the other benevolent : But 
this is the specific idea contained in the text, viz. 
That God always acts in the spirit of his own re- 
quirements," p. 10. If this be so, if God's purpose 
include every thing, and if he always act from be- 
nevolence, in the spirit of his own requirements, his 
will being always holy, then every effect flowing 
from him., (and according to Mr. W. there is no el- 
fect but what does flow from God) every event, will, 
or action of all intelligent beings is holy. J ap- 
peal to every man who can understand when a con- 
clusion is fairly drawn, if this be not a necessary 
consequence of his theory. The fact is so evident 
both from scripture and the experience and ob- 
servation of mankind, that sin, or unholiness exists, 
that it would be an imposition upon my readers to 
undertake to prove it : and, as Mr. Williston's 
scheme of doctrine so manifestly proves that there 
is no such thing as sin, it must be false. Its falsity 
is susceptible of the plainest proof. 

Whatever doctrine contradicts the testimony of 
God in his sacred word, and the experience of 



S2 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

mankind, must be false : but the doctrine of Mr. 
Williston, which asserts, that God worketh all 
things, and that all he works is holy, contradicts the 
sacred scriptures, and the experience of mankind, 
which declare the existence of sin or unholiness ; 
therefore that doctrine is false. The truth of the 
minor proposition has been seen in the preceding 
quotations from Mr. Ws book. 

To avoid this consequence, hovvever, Mr. W. 
makes a distinction between what God does, and 
what man does. This distinction we consider very 
proper. It has a foundation in scripture and rea- 
son. And the rays of truth beaming forth from 
these fountains constrain the Hopkinsians to admit 
such a distinction. The decrees, says Mr. W. or 
the purpose, is the rule by which God regulates his 
ewn conduct : The commands are the rule of man's 
conduct. So say we. But the moment this dis- 
tinction is admitted, Hopkinsianism is put to flight. 
That doctrine asserts. That God hath decreed 
every thing, and that he brings every thing to 
pass by his own agency. This sweeping prop- 
osition, like a mighty torrent rushing from its foun- 
tain, carries away with it motives, commands, free 
moral agency, and accountability, into the dead sea 
of necessity, where they quietly sink to rise no 
more — until the drain of truth is opened to draw off 
the stagnant waters of error. 

Then, indeed, the Sun of righteousness rising 
upon it, we are enabled to behold motives, com- 
mands, and free responsible agents. We can then 
see a harmonious difference between the decrees 
of God, by which he regulates his own conduct, and 
the commands, by which man ought to regulate his 
conduct. But so long as Mr. W. holds fast his 
first principle, that God worketh all things, and 
brings every thing to pass by his own agency, his 
distinction founded in truth, is destroyed. And as 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 33 

the distinction is founded in truth, and therefore 
ought to be supported by every lover of truth, and 
as the proposition, that God worketh all things is 
subversive of that true distinction, it follows that 
the proposition itself is false. Thus we find, that 
whenever the Hopkinsians suffer their free willing 
minds to be guided by the line of truth, they run 
directly against their system, and help us to expose 
its absurdity. Let us see if this be not so. 

"God worketh all things according to his own 
will and pleasure'^ — " He brings every thing to 
pass." Are the decrees effected ? " God workeih 
them." Are commands decreed and promulgcd ? 
God does this also. Are these commands violated ? 
If this violation be ayiy thing, effect, or event ; and 
if God worketh all things, he worketh this violation 
also. Is there any will, purpose, or design brought 
into existence in the hearts of men or devils ? God 
worketh these also, if Mr. Williston's doctrine be 
true ; for his first proposition being universal, it 
admits of no exceptions. Now, pray tell us, ye 
that are initiated into the mysteries of this divinit 
ty, what there is left, for either angels, men, or de- 
vils to do ? Where now is his distinction ? It has 
fled with commands and responsibility from the 
universe. But here are two propositions maintain- 
ed by Mr. W, as contradictory to each other, as it 
would be to say that a man is fast bound, and at 
perfect liberty at the same time. We pronounce 
them absolutely irreconcilable. That their con- 
tradiction is so apparent, that it amounts to a self- 
evident absurdity. No argument, no reasoning or 
testimony, can make their opposition more appa- 
rent. We call upon Mr. W. either to do away their 
apparent contrariety, or abandon one of them. To 
do the first, we think him totally incompetent : to 
do the latter, will be to renounce Hopkinsianism, 
whichj we fear he is not willing to do. We have a 



34 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

faint hope, however, that he has so much regard for 
scripture, reason, and the consistency of truth, 
(that bright offspring of Deity), that he will undergo 
the mortification of acknowledging his error, rather 
than sacrifice so many invaluable blessings. How- 
ever, we are but fallible men, like himself. We 
may, therefore, labour under a mistake. Our minds 
are open to conviction. And if he will reconcile 
these jarring propositions, so that we can perceive 
their harmony, and likewise prove, that, consist- 
ently with his doctrine, there is any unholiness in 
the world, we will frankly acknowledge our mis- 
take, ai>d being thankful for this additional knowl- 
edge, sit down in perfect tranquility, believing that 
Jnasmuch as all things are decreed, therefore all 
things are right ; we were right while we opposed 
him, and we are right in ceasing to oppose him. 
So without acknowledging any criminal ignorance, 
or error, we can unite on true Hopkinsian princi- 
ples. 

The reader, however, need have no hesitancy 
which proposition to sacrifice. It is a self-evident 
truth, and also every where taught in the scriptures, 
that many things are brought to pass by wicked 
men and devils, which God neither decreed nor 
commanded. Satan is represented as working in 
the hearts of the children of dis obedience. Here then 
is one thing the Lord does not work. ' Depart 
from me, will the Lord Jesus say to the wicked in 
the last day, all ye workers of iniquity.' Here also 
were zyorA:ers besides God, and zoorks, which were 
not brought to pass by him. The sacred scriptures 
of truth must not be sacrificed upon the altar of Hop- 
kinsian divinity. They were given by the inspi- 
ration of God. That, according to their own con- 
cessions, is not revealed in the word of God. It is, 
say they, his secret -will and purpose. And it may 
well be called secret, for the penetrating eye of 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 35 

truth has never yet discovered its existence ; no ray 
of light has ever carried its impression to the mind. 
And will any man forsake the revealed will of God, 
attested and proved by predictions, by miracles, by 
the blood of Jesus Christ, and by the bleeding tes- 
timony of martyred saints, to follow a secret, which, 
when we are informed what it is, appears like a de- 
vouring lion, tormenting thousands in hell fire, for 
having fulfilled its secret workings, and yielded to 
its secret influence ! If a blush of shame or of in- 
dignation, could redden the face of an Angel, I 
think the promulgation of such a blasphemous doc- 
trine might cause them to hide their faces before 
the holy throne. 

I will lay before the reader, one more of the ab- 
surdities, which flows from Mr. Williston's doctrine. 
He believes in the day of judgment, in which all 
men will be rewarded or punished according to 
their work? t but he also believes, if he has written 
what he believes, that all things were immutably 
fixed from eternity, and that every thing is worked 
and brought to pass by the Almighty. It has al- 
ready been proved, that if God do every thing, 
there is nothing left for man to do. And if nothing 
for him to do, for what is he to be judged ? Why 
must the wicked be condemned and the righteous 
rewarded ? They have neither of them done any 
thing, if Mr. Williston's first principle be true ; and 
therefore they are not subjects of moral govern- 
ment, neither rewardable nor punishable. This 
conclusion, we think self-evident. It needs no ar- 
gument, no extraneous testimony to make its truth 
more apparent. We may indeed reason ad absur- 
duni: we may suppose it false, for the purpose of 
seeing the absurd consequences which must result 
from its supposed falsity-. If *hen man is to be 
punished, or rewarded fordoing nothing, or for be- 
ing a mere passive agent in the hands of God, then 



36 ON UNIVERSAL DiVIPfE 

the axe with which you hew the wood, the whip 
with which you correct your child, the quadrant 
with which you ascertain the lattitude and longi- 
tude, the compass with which you direct your 
course, may all be subjects of reward and punish- 
ment. But the supposition is so manifestly absurd, 
that it would be presuming too much upon the pa- 
tience of the reader, to pursue it any farther. The 
doctrine of Mr. W. therefore is totally subversive 
of the day of judgment. And as it is one of the im- 
portant truths of revelation, that mankind will be 
judged according to their works, and as Mr. W's, 
scheme entirely overthrows the possibility of their 
being thus judged, therefore that doctrine must be 
false^ 

To all this, it is probable Mr. W. will reply, 
** We go farther in asserting free agency, than the 
Arminians themselves do." We " hold that all 
rational beings are free agents, however great, and 
however confirmed their depravity," p. 20. On 
reading this passage, I began to revive, dind faintli/ 
hoped that some new light would be reflected on this 
mysterious subject — That it might he possible to 
perceive some agreement between Mr. W's doctrine 
of universal divine efficiency and human liberty. 
I therefore eagerly perused the pages upon this 
subject ; but how was my faint hope blasted, when 
I found a tacit acknowledgment that such agree- 
ment is impossible. For, it is presumed, had he 
seen any possible w^ay to reconcile those two prop- 
ositions, that, wiih all the help he had in writing 
his book, it would have been done. That the 
reader may determine for himself whether he has 
shewn any agreement between these jarring senti- 
ments, I will lay before him the principal argu- 
ments he has used for this purpose. His deffini- 
tion of free agency may be found in p. 20r 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 37 

" What is a free agent ? Is it not a rational being 
who has faculties to discern between good and evil, 
and who exercises choice, and who is accountable 
for his conduct?'' This then is his free agent. Let 
us look at him. The devils and all the reprobates 
are excluded, by an eternal decree, and by the pre- 
sent exciting; agency of God, from participating in 
any of the lilessings of the gospel, can do nothing 
but sin, being held under an invincible moral ina- 
bility, which God utterly refuses to destroy ; but 
though they can no more cease from sinning than 
the unalterable determinations of God respecting 
their present and eternal state can be altered, yet 
they can distinguish between good and evil, and 
can choose the evil, not the good : Now, according 
to Mr. W. these beings are free moral agents, and 
accountable for their conduct ! A man shut up in the 
prison for some capital crime, may choose to be at 
liberty ; but his chains, the bolted doors, and the 
walls of his prison, entirely prevent him ; but yet, 
according to the above definition of free agency, 
this poor man is perfectly free, merely because he 
chooses to be free ! A fish caught in the net, feeling 
uneasy in his confinement, chooies and struggles to 
be free, he therefore is a free accountable agent. 
Judas was predestined by the decree of God, lobe 
covetous, to betray Christ ; his faculties enabled 
him to distinguish that conduct to be a moral evil, 
but having no moral ability to do otherwise, he 
could not but sin ; nevertheless, according to Mr, 
W. he was a free mora! agent, and responsible for 
his treacherous conduct! The elect, when com- 
pelled by Almighty power, choose to love God, and 
to have " some holiness and some sin," because 
they cannot choose otherwise ; they are therefore 
free moral agents, and responsible beings. How 
studiously is all ability to do, as well as to choose, 
denied to man in this definition of Mr. W. It ap- 

D 



38 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

pears to us too evident to need much proof, that if 
this be all that is necessary to conslitute a free 
agent, every man, who is yet a probationer, is 
something more than a free responsible agent. — 
Suppose Mr. W. had chosen to write his book, but 
had found himself unable, whether from a natural^ 
or moralinability to have written a single sentence ; 
would he have considered himself a free agent in 
that case — free to write or not to write ? and would 
he have been accountable for not writing a book 
which he had no power to do ? It seems he chose to 
reconcile his doctrine of decrees, with human lib- 
erty ; but he failed in the attempt for want of the 
powerful presence of truth : was he therefore free 
to effect that reconciliation which he had no power 
to do ? And is he accountable for not doing it, see- 
ing it was impossible ? This would be a hard case. 

it is granted, that, if under such circumstances, 
a man is a free moral agent, we may perceive some 
agreement between such a free agent, and irresist- 
ible decrees ; for the choice of a man being fixed 
by the exciting agency of God, and all his actions 
directed by an irresistible impulse, he may choose, 
in this sense, as God impelled him. But it is 
equally mamfest, that the most essential property 
of a free moral agent is wanting in Mr. W's defi- 
nition, namely, ^ poiaer to choose among a variety 
of objects, which he will, without being compelled 
by an extraneous power ; and also, in most instan- 
ces, a power to do or noi lo do^ good or evil. This 
power we think essential to constitute a free moral 
agent. 

Let us now hear how he will reconcile his doc- 
trine with free moral agency. " As to free agency, 
I would say, 1. We are conscious of a different free- 
dom from the pen with which we write." Then we 
are conscious that the above definition of free agen- 
r.y is essentially defective. Bat go on. " Con* 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 39 

sciousiiess belongs to the first kind of proof. I 
know that 1 choose to write, but I know that my 
pen has no choice about it. This makes as much 
as a small shade of difference between me and my 
])en. Seep. 24. 2dly. My conscience either ac- 
cuses, or else excuses my actions, and passes judg- 
ment even upon the thoughts of my heart/' This 
is good proof; and it is a proof too, that our con- 
science tells us we might have done otherwise ; and 
also that Mr. TV's definition is very imperfect. — 
Proceed. '' This is another proof that 1 am not a 
machine." More than that, Sir. It is a proof that 
the doctrine of a universal divine efficiency is a 
machine of man's invention. '' 3. Wc treat one 
another as free agents. This appears from all the 
regulations of society, such as having laws, and 
judges, prisons, &c." For what ? To shut up the re- 
probates, who have exactly answered the end of 
their existence, by fulfilling the counsel of God's 
will ? Unhappy men ! Bound by an irresistible in- 
fluence, to 07di/ one line of conduct, and that ac- 
cording to the good pleasure of God, must never- 
theless come under the penalty of law, be haled be- 
fore the Judge, and condemned to the prison of hell ! 
But let us hear Mr. W. out. " 4. The Supreme 
Being treats us as free and accountable agents, by 
giving us a moral law, and by rewarding and pun- 
ishing us according to the character we possess. — 
Are not these as good and substantial proof of our 
free agency as we could desire ?".p. 20. It is an- 
swered, yes. But they are more — they are not on- 
ly evidence that we are free agents, but also good 
and substantial proof, that we are possessed of 
power to rZo, as well as to choose to do. Nay, more 
yet. They are undeniable evidence that the doc- 
trine of Hopkinsiaa decrees, is totally incompatible 
with free moral agency. Not so, says Mr. W. 



40 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

" Let us now see what proof there is of our en- 
tire dependence on God ; I mean dependence on 
him when considered as free moral agents j i. e. 
tliat our zoill is dependent on his agency. The 
scriptures assert this dependence, and reason can 
discover no other consistent way. Paul tells the 
Philippinns that it was God that worked in them to 
7Mill and to do." True ; but did he tell the Gala- 
tians that God worked in them to will and to Jo, 
when they departed from the simplicity of the gos- 
pel ? Did Jesus Christ tell the people that God, 
%vhile the husbandman slept, sowed /ares among the 
wheat ? Did he not say an enemy hath done this ? 
Did king David say that the Lord God zoorkeih in 
liim to willj i. e. to lust after Bathsheba, and to do^ 
i. e. to commit adultery, and to murder Uriah her 
husband ? Did the Lord Jesus declare to the wick- 
ed Jews, that God worked in them to will and to Jo, 
when he told them, ' Ye are of your father the devil, 
and the lusts of your father ?/e willdo^ 1 This is the 
question in dispute between us ; whether God works 
in the hearts oi wicked men to cause them to will and 
to do wickedly ; and not, whether he works in the 
hearts of sinners to induce them, as free moral 
asients, to repent, forsake their sins, believe in 
ChrivSt, and be saved : nor whether he works in the 
hearts of believers, to will and to do, that is, to 
work out their salvation with fear and trembling. 
This exhilarating doctrine we know, and always 
believed and taught, is perpetually inculcated in 
the sacred scriptures. It is true, we do not believe 
that God works irresistibly. The sinner and the 
saint have it in their power to resist this gracious 
influence of divine operation. But are sinners 
equally dependent on God for their zvicked designs 
and actions? Let us see if Mr. W. touches this 
^question in his plan of reconciling his system of de- 
crees with free moral agency. " In the close of 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 41 

his epistle to the Hebrews, he prayed that the God 
of peace would work in them, that which was pleas- 
ing in his sight." Good. But do we find him any- 
where praying that God would woikin them ^nevil 
heart of unbelief, that they might depart from the 
living God? Did he any where declare that God 
Toorked in those apostates mentioned in ch. vi. 5 — 7, 
and ch. x. 2G — 30. to cause them by an efficient op- 
eration, to crucify the Son of God afresh, and put 
him to an open shame — to sin wilfully after they 
had received the knowledge of the truth — to do des- 
pite to the Spirit of grace ? Mr. Williston's doctrine 
makes evil men and seducers, backsliders and 
apostates, as much dependent on God, for all their 
volitions, by an efficient operation, as are the saints 
for all their volitions and actions. But that there 
is no scripture warrant for that doctrine is manifest ; 
for, if there had been any, 1 presume he would 
have favoured us, in this paragraph, at least with 
one text. That he has not, the reader shall judge 
for himself. " This implied, tlrat if they had any 
thing in ihem which was pleasing, that is, any good 
moral exercises, God himself must produce them 
in their hearts." Very true : but does it also im- 
ply, that if they have any thing displeasing, that is, 
any wicked moral exercises, God himself must pro- 
duce them in their hearts ? It would be extremely 
difficult, I think, to prove this. But, — " The apos- 
tle James, speaking of the new birth, says ; ' Of 
his own will begat he us." And Jesus Christ taught 
that men are born of the Spirit. And God says in 
the prophecy of Ezekiel, * Anew heart will / give 
you.' " But did either the prophet or the ajjostles, 
or the Lord Jesus, when speaking of the old man 
which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts, say 
that this was begotten according to the will of God, 
— that he had given it to them who possessed it, for 
the purpose of enticing them i;ito sin, that they 

p 2 



42 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

might be damned ? A text of scripture proving this 
doctrine, so dear to Mr. Williston, would have 
answered his purpose. He shall be permitted, 
however, to speak for himself. " There might be 
innumerable quotations made from the scriptures, 
to prove that men are dependent on God for their 
moral exercises." What! wicked moral exercises 2 
I believe not. I know of none. And, it is believ- 
ed, he knew of none, else we should have seen 
them in this quotation. "And if the inspired vo- 
lume had not taught this, reason could not teach us 
any other scheme, for we cannot conceive of any 
independence in crm/et? beings." " Here then are 
two things proved from the bible ; so fully proved 
that there cannot be any mistake : why then should 
■we deny either of them ?" p. 21. Sure enough- 
why should we ? For my part, if he will restrict the 
dependence of the will on the exciting agency of 
God, to the willing of good things, and the depend- 
ence of men for '* moral exercises," to good morsil 
exercises ; and admit the qualifying term absolute 
independence in created beings, I feel no disposi- 
tion to controvert a single sentiment he has advan^ 
ced on this subject, with the exception of his defi- 
nition of human liberty and responsibility ; for, I 
do not think he has " proved that definition from 
the bible," nor from the reason of things. But, 
though I heartily agree, in the general, with what 
he has said in favour of our dependence on God 
for aXlgood moral exercises, I am quite certain that 
in all this he has not touched the disputed question. 
As before observed, we never dreamed of exalting 
man into an independent being, nor of making him 
independent of divine grace for his moral ability to 
repent, believe, and be saved; nor yet, of making 
him the author of his new birth, or of his present 
and eternal salvation. If Mr. Williston will point 
to a single sentence in my book, or to any of our 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 4 



o 



established doctrines, which, by a fair and candid 
construction, will authorize the belief, that we as» 
cribe to man a power, independent of the direct ope- 
ration of the Holy Spirit, to will or to do, any good 
word or work, I hereby promise to retract it. — 
tVhat then has he effected in all this ? Just nothing 
at all to his purpose. He has not eren attempted 
to prove, that God, by an irresistible influence, 
works in wicked men to induce them to commit 
moral evil. He well knew, that the moment he at- 
tempted this, he would not only fly in the face of 
his position respecting human liberty, but also im- 
peach the inflexible justice of Almighty God, in 
the punishment of obstinate sinners. But that is 
the very point in debate between us ; otherwise 
there is no difierence. If Mr. W. hold that God 
works upon the hearts of saints and sinners, by a 
resistible influence, to induce them to walk in the 
good and right zuat/ — so do we. If he say, that the 
sinner is dependent on God for his existence as a 
free moral agent, so say we. The only point of 
dilTerence then, on this subject is, does God work 
irresistibly in sinners to make them good^ and irrc- 
istibly on sinners to make them bad^ and to keep 
them so? The truth of this he has not attempted 
10 prove, in his reconciling effort. And I believe 
it beyond the power of any man to prove, or even 
to perceive, any harmony between the doctrine of 
an absolute, universal, and irresistible divine effi- 
ciency, and human liberty, or responsibility. This 
belief is coiifirmed from the consideration, that, if 
Mr. W. had had any prospect of reconciling these 
two opposite points of his scheme, he would, while 
writing professedly on that subject, have given us 
some clue, some light, some argument, or some 
scripture. But be has given us neither. I con- 
sider therefore this silence as an ample acknowl- 
edgment of his total natural and moral inability to 



44 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

reconcile his doctrine of decrees, with any scriptu- 
ral, philosophical, or rational definition of free 
moral agency. One or the other, therefore, of 
these positions must be sacrificed. And as Mr. W. 
has taken his stand among free moral agents, by 
admitting that such human beings exist, it is to be 
hoped that he will, for the sake of so desirable as- 
sociates, for the sake of the dignity of rational be- 
ings ; and above all, for the sake of honouring the 
justice, wisdom, and goodness of God, continue to 
occupy this pleasant field, and to enjoy the society 
of his free willing friends, and with them offer a free 
willing sacrifice to that God, who delights to unfold 
the wonders of his love, to his willing people ; and 
who is bound from the rectitude of his own nature 
to punish those sinners who obstinately persist in 
their iniquities. Will he deny himself all these 
scriptural advantages, rather than abandon the un- 
tenable fort of Hopkinsian decrees ? We sincerely 
pray that this may not be done. 

In p^ 21. note, Mr. W. quotes the following pas- 
Sage from my book. 'We freely grant that (he 
sinner does not take one step towards salvation, 
until divine grace moves him thereto, by enlighten- 
ing his understanding, and by influencing his will,' 
—and he seems quite at a loss to understand what I 
mean by infiuencing the will. His observations 
upon this subject are calculated to induce a belief 
that we deny the necessity of divine grace in re- 
generation ; and, as if, notwithstanding this denial, 
this sentence slipt from me inadvertently. lam 
extremely sorry to be under the necessity of no- 
ticing such disingenuous attempts to misrepresent 
the doctrine of an antagonist. I greatly fear the 
public faith will be weakened in the integrity of 
those who resort to such pitiful methods to defend 
their cause. It seems hardly necessary, since our 
sentiments have been so publiclyj so uniformly 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 45 

known upon this subject, so fully set forth in the 
established articles of our church, and also so fre- 
quently insisted on in my letters to Mr. Williston — 
I say, these things being so, it appears unnecessa- 
ry to attempt a refutation of guch insinuations. — 
We pity the man who is driven to such straits to 
maintain his cause. Every such effort, it is be- 
lieved, will be considered by all candid men, a 
practical acknowledgment of his inability to op- 
pose us with success, on the scriptural ground we 
©ccupy. 

But Mr. W. after a tedious cftbrt to ascertain 
what I mean by God's influencing the w^ill, con- 
cludes, that because we do not hold to entire ijide- 
pendence, if we do not destioy human liberty as 
much as he does, yet we very much abridge it. — 
'•' If therefore divine influence on the will operated 
in the same way to abridge moral liberty, or free 
agency, the least influence would impair it." p. 22, 
We grant, that so far as man is influenced by motive 
or otherwise, his liberty is so far impaired ; and 
if this influence is irresistible his liberty is entirely 
destroyed. But Mr. W. had no reason to believe 
from any thing I had written, that we ascribe ab- 
solute independence to man. There are many 
things with which man is blessed, that are totally 
independent of his choice. His existence : The 
work of Redemption : The external and internal 
evidences of divine revelation : All the proper ob- 
jects of faith exhibited in that revelation : The gifts 
and callings of God: The invisible operations of 
the Holy Spirit : The ofters of eternal life, on the 
conditions of the gospel : The conditional threat- 
nings of eternal death : The power to comply with 
the one and to shun the other: All these inestima- 
ble blessings have flowed from the plenitude of un- 
created goodness, eternal justice and wisdom :— - 
they depended not upon any choice or action of 



4*6 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

man. Here then we see man's dependent state. — - 
There are a thousand things which man may choose 
to have and choose to do but he cannot for want of 
power, or opportunity. And respecting all such 
things which are beyond his ability, he is neither 
at liberty to do, nor responsible for not doing. — 
To instance onjy in one case. Mr. W. chose to re- 
concile his scheme of universal divine efficiency, 
with free moral agency ; but not possessing ade- 
quate powers for such a herculean work, he failed 
in the attempt. In this instance, the extreme dif- 
ficulty, if not the utter impossibility of the subject, 
limited his moral and natural agency, and furnish- 
es an apology for his failure, and exempts him 
from accountability. In all such impossible cases, 
man's liberty is limited. Those blessings which 
come independent of his choice, declare his de- 
pendence : and those beyond his power, circum- 
scribe his free agency, and indicate the limited na- 
ture of his natural and moral powers. The particu- 
lar providence of God may also frequently hedge 
up the way of the wicked to prevent them from do- 
ing all the mischief they choose, and might other- 
wise have done ; thus ' The wrath of men shall 
praise him ; the remainder of wrath thou wilt re- 
strain.' In such instances their agency is circum- 
scribed. For wise reasons also, may good men be 
prevented from doing all the good their benevolent 
hearts might choose, and which, were it not for ad- 
verse circumstances, which can only be resolved 
into a mysterious, but righteous providence, they 
might have done. In this sense their liberty is 
limited ; and where their liberty ends, there their re- 
sponsibility terminates : for no man is responsible 
for that which is beyond his power. No proba- 
tioner will b^ condemned for not repenting when 
he could not. But all probationers are commanded, 
to repent : and all men either are, or have been, or 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 47 

will be probationers ; and therefore all men will 
have had power to repent. Hence all men are 
free moral agents in regard to the work of repent- 
ance. To convict them of sin, *' by a direct opera' 
tion of the spirit of God upon the hearl"*^ is God's 
work : this work is independent of their agency ; 
but they may resist the influence of this direct op- 
eration, ' quench the spirit,' and thereby harden 
themselves in iniquity. In this they exercise the 
prerogatives of free moral agents, for which there- 
fore they are responsible : Or, they may yield to 
this direct operation, indulge a godly sorrow for 
sin, forsake it, pray to God for merry : in this pen- 
itential exercise they act the part of free moral 
agents, and are responsible. To such penitent 
sinners, God reveals the Lord Jesus, in the pecu- 
liar glories of his character, as God-Man, who is 
every way qualified for their Saviour; commands 
them to reverence him as the Son of God, and to 
believe in him as their Almighty Redeemer : but 
believing is their act, in which they exercise their 
moral powers as accountable beings. On condi- 
tion of their thus believing, God restores them to 
his favour, adopts them as his children, sheds his 
love abroad in their hearts, and they are enabled 
to cry Abba Father, This is God's work. Now 
the commandments of God are obeyed, with a lov- 
ing, filial, obedient heart. It is God's work to 
command — man's to obey : obeying he acts as a 
free moral agent, for which he is accountable to 
God. Here is, it' \ may so call it, a harmonious 
opposition — a perfect agreement between divine 
and human agency. God draws ; man runs after 
him : God works upon his heart ; and man co-ope- 
rates with his God. He leads ; man follows : He 
persuades, not compels; man yields to the persua- 
sion : He gives ; man receives : He promises ; man 
believes : He threatens ; man avoids : He sheds 



48 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

abroad his love in the heart ; man loves him in re- 
turn ; and thankfully adoring the benevolent hand 
from which he receives so many unmerited favours, 
he runs the way of God's commands with obedient 
delight. 

Who will say any thing against this limited de- 
pendent, free moral agency? Is it not scriptural ? ra- 
tional? Is it not perfectly compatible with that di- 
vine influence so necessary to change and purify the 
human heart? Here is no direct, positive, and irre- 
sistible influence to compel man to commit sin.— 
That is the doctrine we oppose ; and not the doctrine 
of a persuasive divine influence to good, which is 
compatible with human responsibility. Let then, 
our opponents, if they wish to oppose us, meet us on 
this ground, and, if truth will beat us off, we will 
gladly abandon it, and surrender ourselves cap- 
tives to that truth by which we are conquered. If 
this be not the point of difference between us and 
the HopkinsianS) I know of no difference at all. — 
And if it be not, let us sit down together under the 
spreading branches of the tree of life^ and regale 
each other with the reviving fruits of redeeming 
love. Let us not fight about words. Verbal dis* 
putes are too trivial to awaken animosity, or to en- 
gage the pen of controversy. 

In pag€ 22, Mr. Williston introduces a singular 
argument. " Now my antagonist manifestly takes 
this ground, that if the Lord directly operate upon 
the heart of a Christian, to produce the most fer- 
vent love, such love is not of the nature of holiness, 
any morje than the shining of the sun, or the flow- 
ing of the water; or, in other words, if it be God 
that makes me holy, then I am not holy." After 
shewing the absurdity of this reasoning, (as was 
very easy for him to do, if I had taken that ground) 
by adverting to the grand work of creation, in p. 
23, he observes, " And who will say, that if God 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 49 

made him holy, then he was not holy ?" It is ex- 
tremely difficult to reply to these remarks without 
reflecting, either upon the understanding, or upon 
the sincerity of Mr. W, and I wish to do neither. 
Doubtless it must be painful to the reader, as it is 
to the author, to be under the necessity, for the vin- 
dication of the truth, so frequently to divert the at- 
tention from tho subject more immediately under 
consideration, to notice the infirmities of our fel- 
low creatures. We may, however, derive some 
benefit from it, in addition to the developcment of 
the controverted truth ; we may perceive eviden- 
ces of the depravity of human nature, the imperfec- 
tion of human judgment, truths expressly taught in 
the sacred scriptures ; and hence we derive an ar- 
gument in favour of the divine authority of that 
book, which, by way of eminence is called the 
Book of God. We may also have an opportunity 
of admiring the exuberant grace of God manifest- 
ing itself in Christ Jesus, through whom God is 
willing, whenever they repent, to pardon the aber- 
rations of his wandering creatures. Thus, while 
we may shed a tear over suffering humanity, and 
indulge a groan on account of the miseries to which 
sin has subjected us, we may adore the patience 
and long-forbearance of our heavenly Father, who 
is ever ready for his Son's sake, to forgive our fol- 
lies. It is possible the ardour of his mind, in the 
warmth of controversy, may have betrayed Mr. 
W. into this very erroneous representation of my 
ground of argumentation. Praying to be kept 
from the like mistakes, and requesting the reader 
Id pardon Mr. W. I return to the argument. 

The ground assigned me by him, I never occu- 
pied, namely, " That if God make man holy, then 
he is not holy ; or if he produce love in me, that love 
i5 not of the nature of holiness." I was so far from 
taking my stand here, that I endeavoured to prove, 

F. 



60 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

that if God produce all things, then all things are 
holy. That this is a correct statement, shall be 
proved. Let. i. p. 26. ' If the Almighty be holy, 
as you must admit, nothing unholy can proceed 
from him.' Let. iii. p. 131. ' A good eause will 
produce a good effect^ and a bad cause a had effect.'^ 
Mr. W. has produced no quotation from my book 
to prove his assertion, and therefore my simple de- 
nial is all he had a right to demand, because the 
burdert of the proof lay upon him. The ground of 
argumentation I occupied was this, That if God 
compel man, by an irresistible influence, either to 
holiness or unholiness, his responsibility is annihi- 
lated, and therefore the one is not rewardable, nor 
the other punishable upon the principles of justice 
and goodness. It matters not how man came by 
jfiis moral qualities in regard to his having them. 
They must be estimated from their own nature, and 
not from the source from whence they proceeded : 
But whether man be accountable for them, as a free 
moral agent, materially depends upon the manner 
of his having cG»me into the possession of them. 

As Mr. Williston has adverted to the original 
creation of man, we will take that circumstance for 
an illustration. How strange would it have ap- 
peared, if when Adam was created and formed, 
God had addressed him in the following language— 
* Well done good and faithful servant : thou hast 
been faithful over a few things, 1 will make thee 
ruler over many' ! Might not Adam have justly ex- 
pressed his astonishment, and have exclaimed, O 
my Creator, what things ? 1 have no conscious- 
ness of any existence until this moment. I never 
thought, willed ner acted, and therefore could not 
have been faithful over any thing. Why then dost 
thou speak of rewarding me, for acts which I never 
performed, and for possessing qualities which thou, 
O my Father, gavesl me from thy own bounty? 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 61 

The grand work of creation, to which Mr. W. 
has alluded, to prove that God worketh all things 
according to the counsel of his will, is as foreign to 
the point in debate, as it would be to say that be- 
cause God by his Holy Spirit changes the heart of 
a sinner, from sin to holiness, he therefore in the 
same manner changes the heart of a saint from ho- 
liness to sin. We know that the work of creation 
in the beauty, order and perfection, which were 
visibly manifested in every part of it, is a sublime 
display of the wisdom, power and goodness of the 
Creator; and that every part of it flowed from his 
omnipotent and prolific hand, without any choice 
or action of man : and also being made superla- 
tively good, every way worthy of its Maker, the en- 
tire perfection of all its parts, their mutual depen- 
dence, their manifest adaption to each other, all per- 
fectly qualified to answer the design of their sacred 
Author, they received his approbation: He saw ilum 
all very good. But does the moral world now, in its 
present state of degradation, exhibit these marks 
of order and perfection ? and does it receive the 
approving language of God, as it did in the begin- 
ning? * When the morning stars sang together, and 
all the sons of God shouted for joy ?' And is man now 
as passive in the hands of God, as the elements 
were out of which man was first formed ? Cer 
tainly not. 

To shew how irrelevant this instance of Almigh- 
ty power and wisdom is, to prove Mr. Willistoa-s 
position, we will suppose God to have created and 
stamped man with a sinful character ; and then, bo- 
cause he was sirifvl, should threaten to dash him to 
pieces for being sinful. How would such conduct 
appear? Just and good? Would it not have fur- 
nished man with just cause of complaint ? Might 
he not have complained, and said, " Why O my 
Creator ! Why must I be punished for being sinful ? 



62 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

since 1 had nothing to do in my creation, nor in the 
formation of my character ? Thou sayest, indeed, 
that I possess sinful qualities ; hut am I accounta- 
ble for them ? Thou gavest them me, entirely inde- 
pendent of my choice or action ; and if thou art 
displeased with me, because of these sinful quali- 
ties, is it — (O my Maker, be not angry with me, if 
1 presume to plead with thee for a moment — ) is it 
my fault ? Ihad no control over thy power, nor over 
the elements from which } was formed. Must I 
then suffer the vengeanre of eternal fire, for having 
been made by thee as I am ? O be merciful to thy 
poor dependent creature. If thou hadst made me 
"with 2iholy nature^ and 1 had voluntarily abused my 
high privileges, thy inflexible justice might have 
punished me, although perhaps, as thou art un- 
bounded in goodness, thou mJghtest have pitied 
me.*' 

We grant that every character w^hich God has 
formed, is as he formed ii, possessing those quali- 
ties which he gave it : but we insist, upon the au- 
thority of eternal truth, that every character which 
is formed by the divine hand is good^ possessing 
all the qualities essential to its perfection : and we 
also insist, that so far as a holy character is de- 
pendent on God for its qualities, although it may 
be worthy of praise, it is not accountable for those 
qualities, nor deserving of reward. But we think it 
equally certain that sinners are not indebted to God 
for their sinful character. If when Mr. Williston 
referred us to the work of creation for proof of his 
doctrine, he had proved that God had created man 
sinful, he might have proved his point. A^^tiow^ 
stands, I consider all he has said upon tbis subject 
a desponding effert to defend his tottering system. 
He well knew that we never denied the original 
perfection of the creation, nor its entire depend- 
ence on God for its existence. This evasion was 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 53 

exposed in Letter i. p. 48. All therefore that he 
has said about God's having created the world, is 
as foreip;n to the point at issue between us, as if he 
had laboured to prove that the sun did not create 
itself. Why then resort to this instance of Almigh- 
ty power and wisdom, to prove that God is the ef- 
fectuating cause of moral evil ? Should he not rath- 
er have employed his talent in proving what he so 
frequently insists upon, namely, that God is as much 
the author of wicked, as of holy characters ? But 
does the fact that all things were created good, 
prove that God has made mankind bad /^ Let then 
Mr. W. fix upon some other data as the foundation 
of his superstructure, besides the creation of the 
world, or acknowledge himself incompetent to de- 
fend it. Those divine materials will never suit in 
an edifice which is composed of so much moral 
evil. Let him attempt a reconciliation of his con- 
tradictory propositions, as he has laid them down, 
namely, as universals — All things are worked by 
the Almighty, and all things are according to his 
good pleasure. Let him shew, if able, how the 
justice and goodness of God can be vindicated in 
punishing the reprobates with everlasting destruc- 
tion, who have exactly fulfilled the counsel of his 
will, being excited to all their actions by the secret 
will, and efficient operation of God. And let him 
bring plain unequivocai scripture, and unadultera- 
ted reason for proof. Until this is done, aud we be- 
lieve it never will be, we shall remain in the full 
persuasion that his edifice is founded in error, and 
therefore must ultimately fall before the steady 
gales of gospel truth. 

Perhaps some of our readers may think we have 
already expended more time and labour in demol- 
ishing this tottering theory, than it deserves. So 
we also think — but not more than thei/ deserve. 
It is principally for their sakas that this controvei'- 

E 2 



d4 on universal divine 

sy is continued. They have immortal souls to 
save or loose ; and it is all-important to have re- 
moved out of their path, the stumbling blocks which 
Hopkinsian divinity has laid in their way, that they 
may come to Christ, and receive that life, for which 
they were created and redeemed. To do this ef- 
fectually, we submit to canvass the arguments of 
Mr. W. still farther. 

' But why talk of the Impediments of Hopkinsian 
divinity?^ Is not your own doctrine attended with 
the same difficulties you have inferred from ours ?' 
*' The author of the letters was aware of the same 
difficulties attending his scheme w^hich he charges 
upon ours : He suggested the difficulty without do- 
ing any thing to remove it. In his preface he 
says, ' Whatever mysteries therefore, there may be 
in the science of human nature, and however diffi- 
cult it may be to obviate the objections which may 
be urged from prescience, there is no fact more 
certain than this, that man is a free agent as it re- 
spects his moral conduct.' So say we : However 
difficult it may be to obviate the difficulties which 
may be urged h^om fore ordination, there is no fact 
more certain than this, that man is a free agent as it 
respects his moral conduct. If our antagonist had 
stopped to obviate the objections which may be 
urged from prescience, he would have furnished us 
with the means of obviating those v/hich may be 
urged from foreordination ; at least so far as the 
absolute certainty of future events is concerned.^' 
p. 28. 

From this quotation it is obvious that our author 
infers the same difficulties from divine prescieiice, as 
from C^Wunsiic foreordination. It is presumed, 
however, that a little attention to the specific dif- 
ference between them, will evince that while fore- 
ordination, Calvinistically understood, involves the 
doctrine of fatalism, and reduces ail things to the 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 55 

Standard of strict necessity — prescience is perfectly 
compatible with human liberty ; and while it fixes 
the culpability of criminal actions upon the sinner 
himself, it encircles the divine character with the 
glory of man's salvation. We will attempt an elu- 
cidation of this profound subject, requesting the 
reader to make allowance for the barrenness of hu- 
man language. 

That this may be done, it is important to state the 
difference between foreordinalion and foreknoivl' 
edge. According to the doctrine of foreordinalion, 
every thing, every motive, volition and action are 
made certain by an immutable decree, which was 
made antecedent to man's existence, and by a pre- 
sent exciting, divine efficiency ; and all this so 
certainly fixed^ that they could not have been oth- 
erwise. This is the doctrine espoused by Mr. 
Williston. The doctrine oi prescience teaches, that 
God foreknew, (if it be proper to use that term in 
application to Deity, whose knowledge is infinite) 
a thing wouldhe so, because he saw his intelligent 
creatures would do so. This observation must be 
restricted to those events which depended upon 
the voluntary choice and conduct of rational beings. 
In regard to the creation of the world, and all those 
events which depended entirely upon God's power, 
without the co-operation of intelligent agents, their 
certainty depended upon his will and power alone. 
Having formed the determination to create and bring 
them to pass, his power effected their existence, for 
which existence, as they were entirely passive, they 
are not accountable. As far as such existence and 
events are concerned, we agree with the Calvinists, 
that they resulted from the power and wisdom of 
God, and are predicated of his predeterminations; 
and that he could not have foreknown their exist- 
ence, unless he had determined they should exist. 
But thedoctfiueof a universal divine efficiency as- 



56 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

serfs that all events, even those which are brought in- 
to existence by free moral agents, are equally the ef- 
fect of God's uncontrolable decree. Here we beg 
leave to differ from them j for, in respect to those 
events which are dependent upon the volitions and 
actions of free moral agents for their existence, di- 
vine knowledge, although it saw them, it had no in- 
fluence in their production, but saw them produced 
by the voluntary agency of free and responsible be- 
ings. Whereas, according to Hopkinsian decrees, 
God saw all things, all the volitions and actions of 
men, in future existence made certain by an irre- 
sistible influence ; and that their certainty depend- 
ed entirely upon the previous appointment or de- 
cree of God ; the object of which decree is effected 
by the present existing influence of God, by mo- 
tives or otherwise. It is believed that it requires 
no great exertion of the understanding to perceive 
that man's free agency is entirely excluded in hav- 
ing any thing to do in fixing the certainty of any 
event whatever, by this doctrine of Mr. Williston. 
But, according to the doctrine of universal pre- 
science which we teach, that perfection in Deity 
which is denominated knowledge, saw those events 
which depended upon the voluntary conduct of free 
agents, originating from the right use or abuse of 
their active powers exerting themselves under the 
persuasive influence of motives, or the resistible 
control of God's moral government ; and the cer- 
iainiy of all such events thus produced, depended, 
not upon an order of God that they must have been 
so, but upon the free choice and actions of men, 
who, by their conduct declared they should be so. 
To illustrate this idea, and this distinction by an ex- 
ample : God created the world, and 'planted a 
garden eastward in Eden ; and there he placed the 
man. And out of the ground made the Lord God 
to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 57 

good for food ; the tree of life also in the midst of 
the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and 
evil.' ' And the Lord God commanded the man' 
— * of the tree of knowledge of good and evil thou 
shalt not eat of it.' Gen. ii. 8 — 16. All this was 
God's own work : it resulted entirely from his own 
good pleasure : He acted as a wise, benevolent, 
powerful, and independent Sovereign. But man 
transgressed this law. This was man^s work : it 
resulted entirely from an abuse of his free moral 
agency uninfluenced by God's decree or agency : 
Man acted as a free moral and responsible agent. 
The first event originated entirely from God's 
choice and action, and was therefore made certain, 
and of course was known to be certain, because 
God determined it should so be, and therefore could 
not have been otherwise : The second event, the 
violation of the divine precept, originated from an 
unnecessary abuse of free moral agency, and was 
made certain, and therefore was seen by the divine 
prescience as certainly depending upon the free 
volitions of man, who freely determined it should 
be so ; but it . might have been otherwise, if man 
had, as he might have done, obeyed the voice of 
his Maker. This appears to us to be a plain, scrip- 
tural, and rational distinction ; and that it perfect- 
ly obviates every difficulty which may be urged 
from the scriptural doctrine of prescience, against 
free moral agency, and human responsibility. But 
will the same arguments remove the difficulties 
which may be urged from the doctrine of Hopkin- 
sia^i decrees, against man's responsibility ? It is 
thought not. For, according to that doctrine, 
Adam's sin was as much determined in the divine 
mind, and as much depended upon the influence of 
divine agency and efficiency, as did the creation : 
and therefore man is as devoid of dispraise for that 
act of diijobedience, as he was for his existence j 



58 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

both of which were determined from eternity, and 
effected by divine power, and were, according to 
Mr. W. perfectly agreeable to the good pleasure of 
God. Whereas, the doctrine of prescience declares 
that there was no necessity originating from an 
antecedent decree, respecting the first, or any oth- 
er transgression ; but that, and every other trans- 
gression, was effected by the free W5e, bu* manifest. 
abuse of man's moral and physical powei*s. 

Now infinite foresight saw Adam acting, and saw 
all the results of his actions, as certainly as it did 
the existence of the world, the existence and local 
situation of Adam in the delightful garden of Eden ; 
but it saw, at tiie same time, that the existence of 
the world, of Adam, of paradise, and the prohibi- 
tion, all depended upon the wise determination 
and Almighty power of God ; and that the act of 
disobedience depended upon the voluntary conduct 
of our first parents, who unnecessarily listened to 
the voice of the tempter, and willingly partook of 
the prohibited fruit. Both events were certainly 
seen in futurity, but their certainty depended upon 
very different agents, and very different circum- 
stances. The one was made certain by a deter- 
mination of God ; the other was made certain by 
the determination of man, a free moral agent. I 
think I see a perfect harmony between the certain- 
ty of such events as certainly depend upon the vo- 
luntary conduct of man, and his free agency and 
just responsibility : but I cannot see any harmony 
between those events which depend upon the al- 
mighty power of God for their certainty, and free 
moral agency. The treachery of Judas, for in- 
stance, according to Mr. W. was made certain by 
an eternal decree, ages before he was born, and 
he was born for that very end ; he could no more 
have resisted the influence of God's exciting agen- 
cy, than he could reverse the immutable laws of 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 59 

heaven and earth — how then could he have been 
responsible for his traitorous conduct ? There is, 
not only no harmony between these two proposi- 
tions, but they are directly at variance : their oppo- 
sition is so manifest, that it amounts to a self-evi- 
dent absurdity ; at least, it appears so to us. if 
we are mistaken, we shall be thankful to any one 
who will rectify our mistake. 

if these arguments will furnish Mr* W. with 
means to reconcile his doctrine of universal divine 
influence, with man's free ap;ei)cyand responsibili- 
ty, he is perfectly welcome to ihein. But, if he 
use them, he must apply them lawfully. Lei his 
image of decrees stand upon all its legs. God 
works all things — All his acts are holy — He is the 
efficient cause of sin — Sin works for good — C'/< '•:::? 
died for the reprobates — But without any intention 
of saving them. Although they fulfil the counsel of 
God'^s zuill, and are irresistibly compelled by 'force 
of the decree to all the sinful acts of their life, they 
must nevertheless be damned eternally for those 
sins which they might have avoided, notwithstand- 
ing they must unavoidably till up the measure of 
their iniquities. I say, if all those features of his 
image are fairly exhibited, and if the arguments 
which we use to reconcile a rational responsibility 
with prescience, will also reconcile his frightful 
doctrine with such responsibility, he is perfectly 
welcome to them. It is ])resumed, however, that 
they will be found too narrow to hide all its enor- 
mities, and too short to cover all its deformities. 
Notwitlistanding all his ingenuity, I believe every 
attentive beholder may read injustice on that side 
from whence unconditional reprobation proceeds, 
and cruelty from whence the decree to produce 
moral evil, and then to punish those who are the 
passive instruments of it, proceeds. If his doc- 
trine be not justly chargeable with these two de- 



60 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

fects, it is because we have always entertained in- 
correct notions of justice and goodness ; for, we 
have always thought that it is unjust to punish a 
man for what he could not avoid, and cniel to hold 
out offers of mercy, when it is never intended to 
bestow any. But according to Mr. W. God offers 
mercy to the reprobates, although Christ had no 
intention of saving them when he died for them. 

To avoid the absurdity of his doctrine, respect- 
ing God's having decreed what he has forbidden, 
and as having brought to pass, that in which he 
hath no pleasure, Mr. W. observes, p. 32. "It is 
thought by some to be totally inconsistent, that God 
should be represented as hardening the hearts of 
men by an efficient operation, and at the same time 
be displeased with them for that hardne^ss. But is 
it not just as difficult to understand how he should 
create a clean heart in us, by an efficient operation, 
and still be pleased with this clean heart ?" To 
have made the case parallel he should have asked ; 
— Is it not as difficult to understand how he could 
have created a clean heart, and be c?wpleased with 
it ? For the present paradox is, how can the Lord 
be Jz^pleased with the work of his own hands : 
and not whether he can be pleased with his own 
work. * If God have decreeu, and if he bring to 
pass all things, how is it that he is displeased with 
those things ? The scriptures plainly assert that 
there are many things, in which he hath no plea- 
sure, which are an abomination to him ; but Calvin- 
ism asserts that all things are according to the 
counsel of. his will, and according to his pleasure. 
Here then, Calvinism is at open war with the scrip- 
tures of truth. There is a palpable contradiction : 
therefore one or the other must be false. Reader, 
which will you believe ? The Holy Scriptures which 
were given by inspiration of God, and which came 
sanctioned with all the authority of an independent 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 61 

being? or Mr. W. many parts of whose production 
scarcely deserve the name of reasoning, which are 
in direct hostility to common sense, to the word of 
God, and above all, to Mr. W. himself? Can you 
hesitate which to believe ? Believe them both you 
cannot. Moreover, God declares he hath no plea- 
sure in wickedness, neither for its own sake, nor on 
account of its utility ; but he delighteth in right- 
eousness for its own sake, it being a copy of his own 
image, and also on account of its beneficial effects, 
wherever its influence is felt. Therefore, allowing 
that the sinner receives his sinfulness immediately 
from God, as the saint does his righteousness, still 
the word of God niust be adhered to, which saith. 
Thou takest no pleasure in wickedness. But it is no 
where said in scripture, neither is it supported by 
rational argument, that the sinner receives his sin- 
fulness from God. He is infinitely holy; and no 
unholiness can proceed from him. If Mr. W. will 
refer us to any text of scripture, or to any correct 
reasoning which will prove that God makes a man 
/io/y, and is then displeased with him, he will have 
established a principle from which his conclusion 
^ may be drawn. Perhaps, if he publish again, v;e 
shall be favoured with some reasoning, which will 
induce us to believe. That God is pleased with holi- 
jiess because he made the sinner holy ; therefore 
he is pleased with sinfulness, although he made the 
sinner sinful. But what did I say ? We need not 
wait until he publish again for a similar process of 
reasoning. For, to bring his iri'ational argument 
into a narrow compass, it will stand thus : God 
creates a clean heart in us, with which he is pleas- 
ed; therefore he makes the sinner's heart hard, with 
which he is displeased. If the reader cannot see 
any connection between the last and first proposi- 
tion, perhaps it is because he has not ^ct been to 
those theological seminaries, where the art of rea- 

F 



62 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

soning is taught so as to accommodate itself to 
Hopkinsian theology. For my part, who have 
never had these scholastic advantages, I may be 
excused for not perceiving the conclusiveness of 
such arguments. Be that as it may, Mr. W. thinks 
the argument sound; for he says it " will have 
force with those who believe the divine efficiency 
is employed in causing holiness in our hearts." p. 
3!2. I feel some reluctance in being proscribed by 
so orthodox a gentleman as Mr. W. but if the feel- 
ing no force in his argument must be taken as con- 
clusive evidence of my unbelief in the divine effi- 
ciency in the production of holiness, 1 must sub- 
mit to the classification to which he has assigned 
me ; for certainly I can perceive no more connec- 
tion between his premises and conclusion, than I 
can between the following : — Mr. W. is much pleas- 
ed with his vindication, because it is his own pro- 
duction; therefore he must have been the author 
of my letters to him, with which he is much dis- 
pleased. I hope, however, that the reader will 
not impute this bad reasoning to any want of in- 
tellect, but to the badness of the cause Mr. W. has 
volunteered to support : great allowance should be 
made for a man in captivity, even if his captivity 
be the effect of his own choice. He may be tempt- 
ed to do things he would otherwise despise. And 
when a man is so unforLunate as to tali between ir- 
resistible decrees and free moral agency, which are 
at perpetual variance, we need not be sip'prised, if, 
by their continual rubbing, his intellectual strength 
becomes somewhat impaired. 

It would appear, that, according to the theory 
Sidopted by Mr, W. an action is not sinful, because 
it is wrong in itself; that is, contrary to those im- 
mutable laws which mark the boundaries of moral 
conduct, and which discriminate, with infinite pre- 
cision j the principles of truth and error, justice and 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 63 

injustice ; but its moral turpitude is to be inferred 
from the agent by whom it is produced. This 1 
infer from what he has said in p. 24. note. " As 
far as men are said to do any thing towards form- 
ing a wicked character, it is meant that they take 
the part of wickedness" — " But nothing like this 
is intended, when the Divine being is said to form 
evil characters." It is true, circumstances may 
sanctify an action, which, under different circum- 
stances, would be highly criminal. Such, for in- 
stance, as have been mentioned, respecting pun- 
ishing the wicked, when they choose to be wicked, 
in preference to being righteous. The judge may 
pass sentence of condemnation upon a criminal, 
and order the penalty of the law executed upon him ; 
when, i( he had condemned an innocent man he 
would liavc been guilty of an act of flagrant injus- 
tice. But, when a law, just in its detnands, is tians- 
gressed, the act is wrong, let the agent be who he 
may. And the doctiine now opposed represents 
God as exciting and efficiently influencing men to 
violate those just and holy laws, which eminated 
from his own infinite mind. It represents him as 
determining, planning, and purjjosing in himself io 
deviate from those very laws, whicii are as eternal 
and .immutable as the Being from whom they pro- 
ceeded ; for that doctrine saith, That God worketh 
all things. If [jiercfore any thing is worked contra- 
ry to those laws, He worketh it. It saith God's 
decrees and commands are opposed ^ and that his de- 
crees are the rule by which he regulates his own 
conduct : lie, therefore, opposeth his own com- 
mandments : He, by his exciti'ig agency, makes 
the hearts of sinners hard, forms their character 
wicked, and injluenccs them to violate his holy com- 
mandments. And, to vindicate this doctrine from 
refering wickedness to God, Mr. W. resorts to the 
above distinction. Now, we think iciclcedruss is 



64 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

wickedness^ wherever it is found. It is wickedness, 
because it is wrong iniiseJf: because it is contrary 
to the principles of eternal rectitude, inconsistent 
with the immutable fitness and nature of things. 
And we know of no other correct method of ascer- 
taining the character of any act, but by bringing it 
to the principles of eternal truth and righteousness ; 
and if it be opposed to these principles, it is radi- 
cally defective ; it is highly criminal. But accord- 
ing to Mr. Williston's system, we have only to en- 
quire from whence the action proceeded, to ascer- 
tain its character. We know, indeed, that God 
cannot do any thing wrong; and therefore, when 
we examine the character of an action, and find it 
to possess the marks of wickedness, we immediate- 
ly conclude that God, who is infinitely removed 
from every thing unholy, could not have been the 
author of that action, or of that wicked character. 
But, if Mr. W.'s system be ariopted, it is no proof 
that such a character was not formed by God, be- 
cause it is wicked ; for, according to him, the wick- 
ed are as much dependent on God for their sinful 
character, as the righteous are for their holy char- 
acter. And if we may infer the righteousness of 
God's character, because of the righteousness of 
his ways, from his having created men and angels 
in his own image of righteousness and true holiness^ 
why might we not infer that he is unrighteous if 
he make men wicked ? It appears to us that, if the 
reference is fairly drawn from the one principle, it 
may also be from the other. We are willing to 
submit the correctness of this reasoning to an en- 
lightened public, whose candour will lead them to 
ipake an impartial decision. If a bad machine be 
made, we do not stop to enquire after the name of 
its maker to ascertain his character ; but we in- 
stantly conclude, that, whoever he may be, he is 
deficient, either in wisdom, or power, or goodness. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIEKCV. 65 

And this decision is the result of the dictates of com- 
mon sense. So, in the moral world, if we have in- 
dubitable evidence that any wickedness or unholi- 
ness is brought to pass, we immediately conclude a 
wicked agent has been at work. Not so, says Mr. 
W, '' for God is represented as having a design 
and agency in forming the characters of his" (sin- 
ful) *• creatures." If this be fact, we need no 
longer infer the existence and agency of the devil, 
nor of sinners, when sinful characters are formed, 
and wicked actions are performed. God, accord- 
ing fo this theory, is the only active and responsible 
agent in the universe. Such doctrines shock us. 
They seem to us to carry absurdity upon the \ery 
Eace of them. How they can be believed is diffi- 
cult even to conceive. To attempt a serious and 
formal refutation of them, seems as needless as it 
would to attempt to prove that the man who com- 
mits murder is a wicked man. But when such ab' 
surdities are asserted, and gravely attempted to be 
proved by gentlemen professing to be Christian 
ministers, it gives such a sanction to them, as to 
demand some kind of exposure. That which comes 
to us recommended by the signature of religion, 
and especially the Christian religion, wears such a 
sacred character, has such an imposing aspect, as 
to challenge belief almost without examination. — 
And we are naturally, or superstitiously inclined to 
bow before it, with a sort of reverence. On this 
account, it becomes the more necessary to expose 
enors which are sanctified by such high authority. 
The more impoitant the subject, and the more sa- 
cred its character, the more patient should be our 
investigation, and the more minute and circumspect 
our examination. These serious considerations 
have induced us to submit to the otherwise disa- 
greeable labour of following Mr. W. in his strange, 
and to us, inconsistent doctrines. And we hope 

F 2 



66 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

this will be a sufficient apology for detaining the 
reader so long in this field of controversy. We 
have found so many briars of error, so many thorns 
of absurdities, and so many impassable gulphs of 
deep and incredible mysteries, that we could not 
pass along without attempting to remove these se- 
rious impediments out of the way. 

To avoid such necessary consequences of his 
doctrine, Mr. W. has denied the truth of the axiom, 
that an effect partakes of the moral likeness of its 
cause. Hear his remarks upon this subject : " It 
must be an intelligent being to produce unintelligent 
and inert matter. Here the effect does not at all 
partake of the nature of the cause. So a holi/]he- 
ing may form one that is unholy." p. 256. In re- 
gard to the unintelligent part of the creation, neith- 
er morality nor immorality is predicable of it ; but 
according to Moses, whose authority in this in- 
stance will not be invalidated by any thing, Mr. 
W. can say, this part of the creation was good; 
and it received the approbation of its Creator, as 
Tvell as the intelligent part. The goodness there- 
fore, as well as the power and wisdom of the Crea- 
tor, is inferable from the goodness of the unintelli- 
gent part of his work, it being as manifest an evi- 
dence of his perfection, as was the intelligent. We 
do not, indeed, suppose that it possessed moral 
goodness ; but that kind of goodness which may be 
affirmed of any thing which perfectly answers its 
end. And if this part of the Creation had been so 
defective as not to have answered the end of its 
creation and formation, as not to have been adapt- 
ed to the place it was designed to occupy, that de- 
fect would have been an evidence of the want, 
either of wisdom, power, or goodness in the Crea- 
tor. In this sense then the maxim holds good, that 
an effect must partake of the likeness of the cause. 

We apply this maxim, and act upon it daily. — 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 67 

Were a mechanic to make a machine, say a watch, 
that did not answer its end, that did not keep regu- 
lar time, we immediately infer, and very justly too, 
cither, that the watch is not as it was made, or that 
its maker was deficient in knowledge, power, or 
gosdness. And if it be ascertained that his watch- 
es are all of this character, he is pronounced unfit 
for his calling. This mode of ascertaining the 
perfection or imperfection of a cause, or an author, 
is universally adopted. Indeed, we have no other 
correct method of ascertaining the character of an 
author, maker, or cause, than by inferring it from 
the production, formation, or etfects, which we be- 
hold resulting from them. I believe Mr. Hume, 
the infidel philosopher, was the first man that ever 
called the truth of this maxim in question. And 
were it discarded, we can have no criterion to dis- 
tinguish between a wise man and a fool, between a 
powerful and a weak, a good and a bad cause. 

Let us now apply it to those things of which mo- 
rality may be predicated. Here is a foolish, weak, 
and wicked action performed. Who is the author 
of it ? We say, according to the above axiom, it is 
not God, because he is possessed of those perfec- 
tions which preclude the possibility of his being the 
author of a foolish, weak, and wicked act. Deny 
the truth of the axiom, and then you may indeed 
infer that God is the author of such an act. But 
here is a wise, powerful, and righteous action. 
WI)o is its author? If the truth of the axiom be 
not admitted, you may infer that the devil is the 
author of a wise, powerful and righteous action : 
tut admit its truth, and the devil is excluded, and 
the action is ascribed to God ; because, a good 
moral agent, unless it abuses its agency, must pro- 
duce a good moral action. The same reasoning 
will conduct us to the fountain of all those actions 
which are the result of free moral human agents. 



68 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

Here is an act of wickedness, say intentional mur- 
der ; we immediately, and, I think most justly in- 
fer, that a wicked agent has been at work. Nay ; 
but according to Mr. W. who denies the justness of 
the axiom, we have no right to infer any such thing. 
It may have been done by a good moral agent ! 
Herej is a good moral action, say an act of benev- 
olence, of meekness, of goodness ; we immediately 
infer that a good moral agent has been at work. 
O no ; according to Mr. W. This may have been 
done by a bad, avaricious, haughty, wicked man. 
See how truth and error are blended together in this 
scheme. 

Moreover, if this maxim be rejected as false, we 
have no right to infer tliat the world was created 
by a wise, powerful, and good being. If there be 
no resemblance between the effect produced, and 
the agent that produced it, the world, in its original 
perfection, may have resulted from a weak, wicked 
and foolish being ! And how then, does Mr. W. 
know, but that the devil created the world ? If we 
may not infer the character of the agent from the 
effects which are produced, how does he know but 
(hat the devil is the primary cause of ail good, and 
God the primary cause of all evil ? To what des- 
perate assaults upon truth are men driven to sup- 
port a favourite hypothesis. Thus, Mr. W. to sup- 
port his doctrine of universal decrees, is driven to 
deny one of the most evident axioms in science ; 
one that has been admitted by all reflecting men, 
(some infidels excepted) in every age of the world ; 
and an axiom too, which, if rejected, leaves us no 
data to distinguish between trulh and error, her 
tween God and the Devil, between good and bad 
men, or between righteous and unrighteous actions. 
Destroy this axiom, and the judge has no just cri- 
terion to guide his mind in deciding upon any crim- 
inal case which may come before him, He has no 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 69 

right to infer that a man is a murderer, because in- 
tentional murder is proved against him ; the man, 
according to Mr. W. may have had a " holy end in 
view," p. 256. Alas, alas ! that ever such danger- 
ous sentiments should have issued from the press. 
It is well for mankind that the power of truth pre- 
vents the practical influence of such erroneous prin- 
ciples. 

It was asked. How does Mr. W. know, upon his 
principles, but that God is the primary cause of all 
evil ? Indeed he does not scruple to affirm this. — 
And if God be the primary cause of all evil, where 
does good come from ? From the Devil ? No, God 
is the cause of all the good too ? So says Mr. ^V. 
Jejemiah, however, will contradict him ; Out of the 
viouth of the Most H igh proceedeth not eiqil and good. 
And so also will the proverb of the ancients, Wick- 
edness proceedeth from the wicked, 1 Sam. xxiv. 
13. It seems that the axiom, that an cfiect par- 
takes of the moral likeness of its cause, was well 
known in the days of king David ; and had been 
handed down from *' the ancients," in what was 
then called ix proverb, and is now called an axiom. 
JVickedjiess proceedeth from the wicked. But Mr. 
W. affirms that wicked characters are formed by 
the hand of God. And if the proverb of the an- 
cients is true, and Mr. W.'s doctrine be also true, 
then it follows that God is wicked ! See how^ this 
dreadful doctrine represents the God of immaculate 
purity. 

To avoid, however, these blasphemous conse- 
quences, Mr. W. introduces a curious distinction, 
between fjjicient Oindfontal cause. He says God is 
the efficient, but not \hefontal cause of sin ; and he 
says also he is confident that fontal is a word not 
of bis •' own coining," because it comes from the 
*' Latin substantive, fons or fontis, a fountain" — 
" God is not literally, the fountain, whence the 



70 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

water flows* So God is the efficient cause of the 
volitions, which are now flowing out of my heart" 
■ — " and yet it wou!d be improper to say, that he is 
the fontal cause of these volitions," Sic, p. 257. 
This distinction, and these observations, are as 
novel, as they are useless in obviating the difficul- 
ties with which his system is encumbered. 

In what sense does he suppose that God is the 
cause of the water's flowing ? Why, says he, " God 
is the efficient, or eftectuating cause of w^ater's 
flowing from a spring ; and yet God is not the foun- 
tain." Well then, he is not the /b/i^a/ cause of the 
flowing of water ; he is the efficient cause only. Is 
he the fontal cause of man's volitions. No ; for 
says Mr, W. '• They flow from my heart, as their 
proper source or fountain ; but they do not flow 
forth from the heart of God." Well then, God is. 
neither ihQ fontal cause of natural or moral mo- 
tion ; neither the fontal source of the flowing of 
water, nor of the flowing of volitions : that is, he is 
not the fontal cause oi any thing : hence it is, ac- 
cording to Mr. W. highly improper to make him 
thefojital or fountain of any thing. And if he be 
the fontal cause of nothing, why apply this expres- 
sion to him ? Did Mr. W. introduce this novel dis- 
tinction to make it appear that God is the fontal 
cause of nothing ? This to be sure, will prove to 
admiration that there is no likeness between cause 
and effect! for, I believe that there is not much re- 
semblance between di fountain 2Lnd 7iothing, Al- 
though therefore, he has not coined the word, I 
believe he has coined the applicaJion of it to God 
in the way he has, by making him the fontal cause 
of nothing. 

If it be proper to apply this ^vord,/on/a/, to God 
at all, to represent him as the /bwnf am from whence 
the existence of all things flowed, as from an ori- 
ginal cau^e, it must^ I think, be used figuratively ; 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCTi.- 71 

for no one, it is presumed, concludes that God is, 
literally, a fountain of water. And yet he is repre- 
sented as the fountain, or * great first cause' of 
original existence, the fountain of blessedness, the 
fountain of power, wisdom, justice, goodness, holi- 
ness, and truth. Understanding the word in a figu- 
rative sense, when applied to God, where is the dif- 
ference between his being the fontal and efficient 
cause of sin ? Efficient cotiies from the Latiae^'crm^*, 
which signifies to bring to pass, a power to effect, 
effecting, Qnd making. And if, when fountain is ap- 
plied figuratively to God, it signifies, as it undoubt- 
edly does, his being the original cause, the pro- 
ducer and effecter of all things, (moral evil except- 
ed) is it not precisely the same as to say he is the 
efficient cause of all things? For our part we can 
see no difference : neither can we perceive that 
Mr. W. has made any difference. He says God is 
not a literal fountain of water, although he make 
the water to flow : He is not literally \hc fontal 
cause of the water's flowing; but yet, he is the ef' 
fcctuating cause of its flowing. He is not, says Mr. 
W. literally the/o^i^a/ cause of man's volitions, but 
he is the efftctuating cause of his volitions. There- 
fore, does not every reader perceive, that God is 
the cause of man's volitions in the same sense that 
he is the cause of the flowing of water ? Now if he 
make the water flow muddy, and overflow in its 
course meadows, cornfields, &c. sweeping away in 
its rapid torrent all the produce of the earth; is not 
God thc'eflicient ov fontal cause of all (hat muddi- 
ness, and all that devastation ? And if he make the 
human heart sinful by an cflficient o]>era(ion, and 
set the volition of the mind in motion, so that the 
sinner, like Jerehoam of old, who made Israel to sinf 
ommits rapine and murder, and every other abom- 
inalion ; is not God the efiectuating cause, or 
fountain of all these abominations ? An efficient 



72 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

cause is that which immediately produces or makes 
a thing as it is. Thus God was the efficient cause of 
the creation. It was so because he made it so : He 
was Its author. And if he be the efficient cause of 
sin, he makes sin as it is ; gives it its hateful char- 
acter : He is its author, in every sense of the word : 
He is the figurative fountain, or /onia/ cause from 
whence it proceeds. Nay; but " They flow forth 
frorm m^ heart." Yes 5 but who put them into 
your heart? Answer; " He workeih in me to will, 
therefore I say He is the efficient cause of my voli- 
tions," p, 257. And suppose you will to commit 
adultery, or murder, or to steal, or to lie ? Does 
God work by an efficient operation to produce these 
sinful volitions ? Yes ; *' but as these volitions ex- 
ist only in my heart, and not in his, I would say, 
that God is not the fontal, though he is the effi- 
cient cause of my volitions," ibid. I have already 
shewn that the distinction between fontal and effi' 
czejz^ cause, is in name only ; and therefore it fol- 
lows, from these words of Mr. W. that God is the 
original source, the proper author, and the present 
efficient cause of all the sinful volitions of adul- 
terers, liars, thieves, and murderers. *' He worketh 
in me to will," says Mr. W. If therefore the adul- 
terer will to commit adultery, God -works in him to 
will : and as all men generally desire whatever they 
will to do, God works the desire, produces it in the 
heart by an efficient operation, inclines the mind to 
will it, and impels to the actual commission of the 
crime ; and yet, according to Mr. W. God is not the 
author of sin ! I think'it needless to pursue thisar- 
gument any furthei^l:H5cause I am fully persuaded 
that every imparti^ reader will perceive that Mr. 
Ws distinction ^i\ween fontal and efficient cause, 
is peurile, that it does not answer the end of its 
author, nor obviate the difficulty with which his 
scheme is embarrassed. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 73 

Another argument Mr. W. uses, to prove that an 
effect does not partake of the likeness of its cause, 
is " God the Creator made all kinds of animals, the 
noxious and poisonous, as well as the harmless and 
useful : but we do not think of infering thence, that 
the Creator is possessed of all those qualities," p. 
31. He seems to forget, while arguing upon this 
point, what he so strenuously contends for in other 
places, namely, " the entire depravity of the human 
race." While refering to the vegetable and animal 
kingdoms under this head, he founds all his argu- 
ments on the original perfection of the creation. 
Has he forgotten that the earth was cursed on ac- 
count of sin ? Or does he suppose that snakes and 
toads, and other noxious and poisonous animals, 
and poisonous vegetables, were created with all 
their destructive qualities ? He contradistinguishes 
these noxious and poisonous things, from those that 
are ** harmless and useful." Does he mean to in- 
sinuate by this, tliat God created some things in 
the six days^ that were not only useless, but de- 
structive ? What were they to destroy by their poi- 
sonous qualities, when the whole creation was 
stampl with superlative beauty and perfection, and 
placed in an incorruptible state ? W^ere these nox- 
ious and })oisonous animals all very good? If so, 
they may be ranked with sin, almost! Or, does he 
suppose these destructive animals and vegetables 
were afterwards created by the Almighty, and in- 
corporated with sin, foi* the benefit — of the elect, or 
reprobates ? Indeed, if God be the efficient cause of 
sin, he might also be the efficient cause of all the 
noxious and poisonous qualities of snakes, toads, 
spiders, &;c. &:c. But, as none of these hurtful qual- 
ities existed before the introduction of moral evil, 
and therefore were not created by the Almighty, 
they cannot be improved into an objection against 
the genuine maxim, that an etiect partakes of the 

G 



74 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

likeness of the cause. The great first cau«e of uni • 
versal existence was infinitely wise and ^oo</ ; and 
hence Moses has declared, that, when the work of 
creation was finished, it was all very good.—- 
The effect was superlatively good^ because the 
cause was infinitely so — hence the axiom is good 
also. But, says Mr. W. God " hardened the heart 
of Pharaoh : but tiie hardening act in God was not 
hardness, any more than though it had been a soft- 
ening act," p. 31. Be it so. The Smith hardens 
his metals ; but the hardening act in him is not 
hardness ; but it is an act for which the Smith alone 
is responsible. And should we despise, or pity, 
the man who should make any thing hard with de- 
sign, by his own efficient operation, and then find 
fault with it for being hard ? and finally, to show 
his power over it, should prefer an accusation 
against it, procure sentence of condemnation, and 
dash it to pieces? Would he thereby manifest folly ? 
or ignorance ? or wickedness ? By condemning the 
machine, would he not condemn himself? And 
does not the doctrine which represents God as 
hardening Pharaoh by an efficient operation, as 
forming his character wicked according to God's 
own pleasure ; and then complaining of him for 
being so, and dashing him to pieces on account of 
his hardness ; I say, does not this doctrine impute 
some capital defect to God's sacred character? 

The potter forms his vessels upon the wheel, and 
through the instrumentality of fire, hardens them : 
but we do not suppose that the potter is either clay, 
or fir^, or an earthen vessel ; but if the vessel be 
bad, unfit for use, we infer that there was some de^ 
ficiency of wisdom or goodness in the potter, or 
some defect in his materials, or his instruments of 
operation. And if these materials were also of his 
own making, the fault is still justly attributable to 
him,, and hira alone. So also if God form wicked 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. /O 

characters, and if any of them are defective, He 
alone is responsible for the defect. Mr. W's re- 
marks, therefore, do not help his cause any. 

Bat says Mr. W. " Our opponents can no more 
get along than we can, without frequently making a 
distinction between God's taking pleasure in things 
Jbr their own sake, and taking pleasure in the good 
which they are the means of effecting." p. 33. — 
All this is granted. But it is nothing in favour of 
his principle. We know, as he hath remarked in 
respect to God's chastening his people, that ' he 
deeth it for our profit, that we might be partakers 
of his holiness.' But what has this to do with his 
doctrine, which saith that God formeih wicked char- 
acters, in which he has solemnly declared he hath 
to pleasure ? Is this act, by which God chastises his 
children, a sinful act? Or has he any where said 
that he hath no pleasure in holiness. The chas- 
tisement of which the Apostle speaks, was the cor- 
rections of our Heavenly Father, designed for our 
good, which is not a sinful act ; and in which he 
does not take pleasure on its own account, or on 
account of the pain inflicted, but on account of the 
holiness it is designed to produce. Moreover, this 
chastening is the correction of the benevolent Father 
of our spirits, because of our disobedience, that we 
may learn obedience by the things we suffer. It is 
not therefore sinful, but a righteous correcting of 
our heavenly Father, and is substantial proof that 
God does not take pleasure in unrighteousness ; 
for so displeasing is it to him, that he finds it neces- 
sary to use the rod, vvliich otherwise he v;ould not, 
to scourge us for our disobedience. But, how in- 
consistent would it be to infer from tli^se facts, 
that God first made us, and appointed us to disobc' 
dience, that he might have an opportunity to chas- 
tise US for that disobedience : Were a human Fath- 
er to do so bv his children ; that is, first contrive^ 



76 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

and plan, and influence his children to rebel, had 
declare that their rebellion was according to his 
pleasure, and then chastise them with the rod of 
correction for being rebellious, I think his inhu- 
manity would be manifest to all impartial judges. 
St. Paul saith, Heb. xii. II.*' Now no chastening 
for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous ; 
nevertheless, afterwards it yieldeth the peaceable 
fruits of righteousness to them which are exercised 
thereby.' But will Mr. W. say that those repro- 
bates, whose wicked characters are formed by the 
hand of God, are chastened for their good^ and that 
it afterwards yieldeth the peaceable fruits of right- 
eousness to them ? Is the being devoted to sin^ 
and eternal damnation by an efficient decree of pre- 
tention for their good, as well as the " good of the 
community at large ?" Instead of its yielding the 
peaceable fruits of righteousness, it produces the 
quarelsome fruits of wickedness, which end in ever- 
lasting destruction. So little to his purpose is 
this scriptural and rational distinction which we 
make. 

But Mr. W. objects to my illustration in page 19 
of my first letter, by introducing the judge : because 
" It is no part of the work of a human judge to cre- 
ate rational beings^ and form their characters." p. 
24. note. We know it is not. But we may 5wjo- 
pose such a circumstance for the purpose of illus- 
tration. 1 know the unconditional decretists do 
not approve of such illustrations, because they 
carry light into their temple of error and confusion. 
Were a human judge to do, as God is represented 
by Mr. W. as doing, I believe he would be univer- 
sally condemned, because his conduct would have 
been radically and essentially wrong. As before 
stated, we ascertain the morality or immorality of 
an action from its consonance or disonance, to the 
principles of eternal truth and righteousness, and 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 77 

not from tlie agent who is the author of that action. 
I think, therefore, and without any anxiety I am 
v.'iiling my readers should determine upon the cor- 
recfncss of the thought, that tltat illustration is per- 
l:"arnt, and sets Hopkinsian theology in a just point 
of light. If one could believe for a moment, that 
God makes a wicked character, by foreordaining 
and iniiucnciiig him to wickedness, by an efficient 
operation upon his heart, and that heart is in all 
respects just as God would have it ; it is impossi- 
ble for any man to vindicate, (upon any notions we 
have formed of justice,) the justice of God in the 
final and perpetual condemnation of such a charac- 
ter. If it can be done, it will then have been prov- 
ed that all our perceptions of justice and injustice 
have been erroneous. Justice, goodness and wis- 
dom, are the same in God as they are in man ; on- 
ly they exist in the former to an infinite degree : 
Otherwise we have no perceptions at all, of divine 
wisdom, justice and goodness ; for all the percep- 
tions we have of the divine attributes are taken 
from their miniatiu'c resemblance, which God ori- 
ginaly stamped upon his moral picture, man. And 
in whatever degree the traces of this image have 
become obscured by the fall, they are revealed to 
us in the sacred scripture, and by the light of the 
Holy Spirit. In the scriptures we are taught, 
' That it is accepted according to what a man hath, 
and not according to what he hath not.' And the 
perceptions we have of justice are, that a man is not 
to be condemned for what he could not avoid. — 
This maxim appears as evident as any mathematic- 
al demonstration. Let us try Mc- W-s. principle 
by it. Here stands an unholy man before the tri- 
bunal. The sentence of conde^nnation is passed 
upon him — For vrhat ? for having had a sinful char- 
acter. How came he by that character? Mr. W's. 
doctrine answers, God gave il to him. He from 

G 2 



78 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

all eternity decreed that this man should be born 
for this very end ; and that the object of this de- 
cree might be effected, God excited and influenc- 
ed by an efficient operation, this poor despised 
reprobate to sin. Could he have avoided it ? If it 
be said yes, then irresistible decrees are given up. 
If it be said no, then it is affirmed that this man is 
damned forever for doing what he could no more 
have avoided, than he could dethrone the Almighty. 
Now, if this doctrine does not impute injustice, nay 
cruelty to God, then I say we know not what injus- 
tice and cruelty are. And we may totally despair 
of ever perceiving any distinction between justice 
and injustice, or between goodness and cruelty. 
And as this is the view which the illustration allu- 
ded to, was designed to give of Mr. W.'s doctrine, I 
think it answered the end for which it was introdu- 
ced. 

In p. p. 22. 23 of my letters, I observed, that 
God not only saw what would be, but also all that 
might have been. Mr. W. quotes this passage, and, 
after some remarks, he asks " Why did not the might- 
be eve^nts exist ? For an illustration ; — God saw that 
the earth might have had two moons instead of one ; 
but he saw that it would actually have but one. But 
what was there to make the latter certain, while 
the other only might have been ?'' 

The reader is desired to notice the apparent ef- 
forts of my antagonist to evade the real merits of 
the question. He must certainly have known, that 
there was no dispute between us, respecting those 
events which depended entirely upon the good plea- 
sure and power of God for their existence. These 
we know, God determined should exist, and exist 
too, at the time, place, and in the manner they did : 
and we also admit, that God knew that they would 
exist only because he determined they should ; for 
their existence depended entirely upon his will and 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 79 

pleasure ; and therefore they were brought into 
existence perfect^ all bearing distinctive marks of 
the wisdom, power, and goodness of their Adorable 
Creator. But pray tell us, ye that are sharp sighted 
enough to see a consistency between universal and 
irresistible divine influence and human responsibil- 
ity, what has the original perfection of the creation 
to do with moral evil ? Was that created among 
other things, in the six days work ? Did that drop 
perfect from the Creator? and was it also pronoun- 
ced very good? I believe moral evil was never pro- 
nounced good (if we except Satan's address to Eve 
the mother of all living) until some thousands of 
years after the creation ? Was not Dr. Hopkins the 
first author of that benediction on moral evil ? Per- 
haps his followers may think he deserves immortal 
honour, for eulogizing sin ! But, " Why did not the 
might-be events actually exist ?" Answer, because 
they depended upon might-be'^s for their existence. 
1 mean upon the irac volitions of men and Angels. 
They decreed, ordained and chose that they should 
not exist ; and by their free moral agency prevent- 
ed their coming into existence. Thus, the fallen 
Angels might have continued holy as they were 
when created ; but they decreed to do, and actual- 
ly did otherwise. Adam and Eve might have con- 
tinued in the garden of pleasure where their Crea- 
tor placed them ; but they decreed to do, and ac- 
tually did otherwise. Sinners, who continue obsti- 
nate in their sins, might have repented, believed in 
Christ, and have been saved ; but they decreed not 
to do so, and by their own voluntary conduct their 
decree was eifected. Is it said that, according 
to this statement, all those contingent events failed, 
merely because they were dependent upon the voli- 
tions of men ? To obviate this objection, let it be ob- 
served, that there are events, which might not have 
€ome to pass, and yet, because their existence dc- 



86 



ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 



pended upon the choice and actions of men. they 
did actually happen. Thus, Adam might not have 
sinned ; but as this sinful event depended upon his 
volition for its existence, it was, contrary to the ex- 
press command of God, effected : Judas might not 
have betrayed the Lord Jesus into the hands of his 
enemies ; but as that event depended upon ihe free 
choice and voluntary conduct of Judas, it was ef- 
fected in open violation of God's express com- 
mand, — 'Reverend my sou»^ The same observa- 
tions will apply with equal truth, to every sinful 
event, that ever did, or ever will take place :- their 
existence depending upon the determinations of 
free agents they were effected by the voluntary agen- 
cy of men and devils in direct opposition to the de 
cree, law, and will of God : therefore, these volunta- 
ry agents are justly punishable for all those sinful 
events. But, according to Mr. VV. all these wicked 
events resulted from a previous determination, and a 
present exciting agency of God. Does not this doe- 
trine completely exculpate every man, however wick- 
ed, from criminality ? If it do not, we must confess our- 
selves unable to perceive any connection between 
moral obligation and human responsibility : for, if 
we be responsible fpr God's original intentions, 
which existed before the world was made, we may, 
with equal propriety, be responsible, for not " cre- 
ating two moons !" 

I wish this question might be pressed upon the 
reader's understanding. All events which now 
transpire in the moral world, whether they be good 
or bad, rational or in ational, are in perfect con- 
formity to the original determinations of God, and 
are brought into existence by a divine efficient in- 
fluence, — so says Mr. W. — and yet for these events, 
he says, we are accountable. Now, I ask, can any 
man perceive any reason why he should be respon- 
sible for ^e necessary effects of determinations with 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 81 

which he had no more to do, and over which he 
had no more control, than he had over the creation 
of the world ? We confess our entire incapacity 
to perceive any reason whatever. And therefore 
we conclude that those who believe in that doctrine, 
lay aside their rationality, and impose upon them- 
selves and others. Here again, we are brought to 
behold a palpable absurdity on the face of that doc- 
trine which makes man responsible for the occom- 
plishment of purposes, which were formed before 
he was born, and which are irresistibly elTected by 
an influence over which man never had, nor could 
possibly have, any kind of control. What becomes 
of justice ? What of goodness ? Are they not totally 
obscured by this thick mist of Hopkinsian theolo- 
gy ? And so totally obscured, that the eye of reason, 
or of faith, or any other principle with which the 
human mind is acquainted, cannot see either the one 
or the otha* of these adorable attributes. 

Let us, however, attend to his illustration — *' God 
sow there might have been two moons instead of 
one." This subject is too serious, or we should be 
disposed to smile at this observation. However, I 
very much doubt, whciher God ever saw there 
might have been two moons. Did not the exist- 
ence of the moon depend entirely upon the pleas- 
ure of God ? And could there have been two, un- 
less he had determined to create them ? But did he 
determine to create them ? To say he did, is to say 
that he altered his determination. To say he did 
not, is to say that there viight not have been two ; 
unless we suppose this might have heeyi event could 
have caused its own existence. All therefore Mr. 
W, has said upon this subject, I consider a mere 
quibbling attempt to avoid the insuperable difficul- 
ties with which his scheme is embarrassed. 

In p. p. 40, 41. Mr. W. quotes the following 
sentence from my book j — ' If every event which 



82 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

comes to pass is brought to pass by God's plan, &:c. 
then there can be no event however trivial in itself, 
&c.' — and then asks, " Does not the objector see a 
great many trivial things^ as he would call them, in 
the creation ? And yet one and the same God, crea- 
ted the heavens, and the earth, and all the host of 
them." To the question it is answered, that we 
not only see a great many trivial things, but also 
many noxious^ wicked, and foolish things in the 
world, which it is both scriptural and reasonable to 
conclude, were not created by the Almighty, and 
which, therefore, had no existence while the world 
remained in its pristine purity and glory. The 
earth itself was cursed on account of the first trans- 
gression ; and this was part of the awful maledic- 
tion — ' Cursed is the ground for thy sake ; in sor- 
row shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life : 
Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee.' 
Gen. iii. 17, 18. From these solemn words, we 
are justified in concluding, that there are many 
things, even in the vegetable kiagdom, of a noxious 
quality, which would have been forever excluded, 
had they not been introduced as a consequence of 
moral evil. Our seeing these things nozu, is no ev- 
idence that they orighially existed. Out of mercy 
to his cause, it was exceedingly wise in Mr. W. 
to end the quotation from my book as he did, at the 
Tvord trivial.^ That the reader may determine 

* Mr. W. it is true, in p. 30. quotes this passage at full leng-th ; 
but his observations by no means meet its force. Nay, he is 
under the necessity of admitting its conclusiveness in the man- 
ner of his reply ; " If," says he, '* by an unholy effect be meant 
an unholy volition, that is, an unholy exercise of the will, it 
surely proves that there is an unholy heart from whence it 
proceeds." ]Vow ho^v shall we ascertain whether a volition 
be holy or unholy, but by the effects which are producyd by 
that volition ? If we perceive murder, and other wicked ef- 
fects prodnced by a wi'Iiag' mind, must we not conclude that 
the volitions of that rciu <x 'vere wi^d^e ' ? Vnd >Jr, VV. says that 
all kinds of wickeuoess is effected by ihe efficient mind oT God3 



AGENCY AKB EPFlCIENCt. 83 

whether it was from fear of the argument, and a 
sense of his moral inahiUly to encounter it with 
success, or not, I will present it to him as it stands 
in the letter, p. 15. ' If every event which comes 
to pass, is brought to pass by God's plan, as you 
call it, or is an effect of his decree, then there can 
be no event, however trivial in itself, however 
wicked, foolish and inconsistent, but what is in- 
cluded in this plan, which you ascribe to God, and 
which, according to your statement, is the effect of 
his uncontrolabie decree. If this system does not 
ascribe wickedness, foolishness, and absurdity to 
God, there are no such things as wickedness, foolish- 
ness, and absurdity in the world.' Now, Mr. VV. in- 
stead of looking this argument in the face, and en- 
countering it with scriptural and rational weapons, 
bangs u})on the word trivial^ and makes a great ado 
about what he calls trivial things, such as a " glow- 
worm," "fishes," "insects," " hyssop;" and even 

As tliere was a time >vhen no unholiness existed, and if all 
thing's ?iow from God as their i-fficicnt cause, then the first un- 
holy act must have been pruduccd by the Almig^hty — of course, 
that voli lion which produced this unholy effect must have been 
an unholy volition, and also " an unholy heart from whence it 
♦proceeds.'' tSo co'iclusiyely does his doctrine metamorphose 
the Holy one (jf Israel into a bloody Moloch, by representing* 
him as first ivillinf.^ the sinfniness of men and angrls, and then 
as tormfentfng: them in hell-fire forever, for having yielded to 
the impulse of riis secret Tvorking upon their hearts. 

Tukiiig-for g-ranted that God is immutably holy, Mr. VV. con° 
eludes it inipossilile that he can be guilty of any unholv voli- 
tion. This is, to be sure, accurate enough. But it by no 
means alters tlie tendency of his doctrine : and it i^: an undenia- 
ble evidence th.\t the doctrine is false. If I were to assert 
Uiat my antsgooibt is a good man, and in the next breath were 
to siy he iciliefi and conlrivcdj and adurMy effected all the 
wickedness thit ever lock j.Iace in Durham ; would not every 
deliberate man suppose I meant to satarize him, by calling him 
go d ? or otherwise, lh?tl had falsifi'^d his character by saying" 
he hal been guiify of all those evils ? But if I persist in main- 
taining my lajit p »silion, and artually prove it, would any man 
think it was sufficient to vindicate' the goodness of Mr. Ws 
character, merely by saying he ivhii is so ^ood must have had 
a "holy end in view" in contriving and eflfecting" so much 
$?ickedutss ? 



34 ©N UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

while speaking of these, his observations all have 
reference to their having been created. I am al- 
most weary with repeating, that his so frequent re- 
ference to the original perfection of the creation, 
has no kind of bearing on the present controversy. 
We are not arraigning divine wisdom in the crea- 
tion, and first formation of the universe. No tri- 
vial, nor no wicked, nor foolish thing then existed. 
Why did he not shew, if able, that the argument 
was inconclusive which charged his scheme with 
refering all wickedness, foolishness and absurdity 
to God ? Is not the reason very obvious ? Was he 
not incompetent ? I think his inability is tacitly ac- 
knowledged by the oblique view he has taken of it. 
I will now state those trivial things, and those 
wicked, foolish and absurd things, which were then 
on my mind. Look then at the little pranks of 
children, witnessed more or less in every family, 
their chit-chat, their play-things, their innocent 
mirth, &c. hear, (and if the ear is offended, blame 
not the author for writing these trivial things ; for, 
if Mr. W. be correct they were all decreed and 
are brought about by the exciting agency of God ;) 
hear. I say, the croaking of the frogs, the chatter- 
ing of the geese, the hissing of the snake, &c.&c.* 
See the whisking of the Spaniel's tale, the cunning 
mimickry of the ape^ and a thousand olhev trivial 
things. I do not wish to offend the ear of delicacy, 
or many trivial, as Well as foolish things might be 
mentioned, which, according to Mr. W. were not 
only decreed, but actually brought to pass, by the 
divine efficiency. But, listen to the foolish^ ob- 
scene stories of the facetious drunkard over his 
bowl, and the unmeaning reveries of the enthusiast- 
ic courtier. See . the turning and twisting of the 
merry dancer, and behold his feats of gallantry, 
couched under the darkness of night j the foolish 
ail's, the disgusting gesticulations of a ' modern 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 85 

man of fashion ;' the supercilious and haughty airs 
of the self consequential fop; the foolish mincing and 
apish grinnacing of her who spends her days and 
nights in the br^ll chamber or at the theatre ; the 
gaudy, and in many instances, immodest adorning 
of the vain of every class and tribe, whether among 
the aborigines of America, the sons of Africa, or 
the daughters of Europe. All these foolish things,' 
to say no worse of them, arc effected, accorditig to 
Mr. W by a divine efficient operation, and. being 
" parts of the perfect plan," are perfectly pleasing 
to God. The wicked and horrid oaths of (he bold 
blasphemer, the many drunken fits of the degraded 
sot, murder, debauchery ; — a shame to human na- 
ture that such foul crimes must be mentioned. If 
the cheek of modesty blushes at their recital, how 
degraded must those hardened wretches be, who, to 
elude the human eye, hide themselves under the 
curtain of night, while they perpetrate their horrid 
crimes ! Must they also have an antidote, by be- 
ing told, that God, the God of infinite purity is the 
efficient cause of all these shameful abominations ? 
Surely this is sufficient to raise a flush of indigna- 
tion upon the cheek of every one who feels for the 
honour and happiness of mankind. Secret assassin- 
ations, crimes sometimes sanctioned by public ex- 
ample. — Wars — O bleeding, suflering humanity! 
Must the warrior's sword devour its thousands ? 
men, women and children, all fall before his re- 
vengeful arm ! while midnight revellings, sensual 
gratifications, and all kinds of intemperance devouc 
their tens of thousands — until the groaning earth 
disgorging itself of its mighty load, throws them 
headlong to destruction. Are these abominations 
which make desolate, for the " good of the great 
whole" of the human family ? Say, Mr. Williston, 
are these devouring scourges, which drag after 
them plague and pestilence, and every ingredient of 



86 ON UNIVERSAL DlVir^E 

human misery, trivial things ? Do they add to the 
amount of human felicity ? Do they help on the 
Redeemer's kingdom, and help to people the re- 
gion: of perrenial happiness? Answer, Thouvindi- 
cafot of the doctrines of the immortal reformation — 
Ave these crimes brought about by the divine effi- 
ciency ? AH perfectly agreeable to the divine mind ? 
And does God send these atrocious sinners to break 
his commandments? Alas! that ever such senti- 
ments were promulgated by the pen of a reformed 
minister. After naming these crimes of a crimson 
hue, is it necessary also to mention the absurdities 
of error^ of authors, of taunting infidels, of systems 
invented to give countenance to vice ? Must these 
also be imputed to the God of immutable truth, of 
unbounded goodness, and of inflexible justice ? who 
hates all manner of iniquity/, and abhors all lying 
lips. The trembling pulse almost ceases to beat, 
at the recital of such injurious sentiments. 

Here I would pause— if I could have any hope 
of success — and expostulate with Mr. Williston. I 
would ask, what good he can propose to himself in 
attributing all these abominations to God ? Is it not 
enough for the bold infidel, and the smooth tongued 
Socinian, to employ their pens in rendering Chris- 
tianity odious, and in pouring contempt upon its 
sacred author ? Must Christian ministers help to 
confirm them in their unreasonable belief that our 
God is di hard master, that he requires impossibili- 
ties ; punishes his creatures for unavoidable ac- 
tions ; makes them responsible for his own deter- 
minations ? Must they be informed from the profess- 
ed believer in Christ, that the God of the Christians 
is an Almighty tyrant, ruling mankind with a re- 
sistless influence, and then, punishing and reward- 
ing them, for being the passive instruments in ful- 
filling those immutable determinations, which were 
formed before man was made ? Must they be taught 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 87 

to believe that our God is ihe author of lies, of ab- 
surdities, of foolishness ? Can their minds ever be 
brought to reverence and worship such a being ? 
Are not these the proper characteristics of Sataa ? 
O truth ! O author of truth! arise in the greatness 
of thy majesty ! Dispel the gloom. Let this long 
jiight of error be over and past. Let the radiaat 
beams of thy uncreated glories, dart conviction to 
the hearts of mistaken men. Vindicate, O thou 
who dwellest between the cherubims ! vindicate 
thine own spotless throne, from the foul blots which 
the darkening planets of error have cast upon it. 

But it is, I fear, needless to expostulate. Mr, 
Williston is a free moral agent> possessing a ration- 
al soul. And if he can deliberately close his eyes 
upon the light of revelation, reason, and the con- 
sistency and sacred harmony of truth, he alone is 
responsible for it. I cannot help, however, re- 
marking, that if this part of his S3'stem be true, my 
Maker has denied me the power to perceive its 
truth ; and that, if my antagonist sees its consist- 
ency, he has a different soul from mine, or other- 
wise he must have a totally different medium of 
perception. But knowing that God hath made of 
one blood all the nations of the world; that all 
have the same natures, similar powers of mind and 
body; and, those who live under the light of the 
gospel, possess similar means of information, have 
the same common privileges of the sacred scrip- 
tures, the light of the Holy Spirit, and are under the 
government of an impartial God — 1 say, these things 
being considered, 1 believe it will appear evident 
to every impartial man, that Mr. W. closed his eyes 
against the most important point of my argument, 
and fixed his foot on trivial — to cover his retreat 
from the sword of truth, which he found himself in- 
competent to withstand. If, however, he thinks 
himself ^ble, or if any of his brethren, will look it 



88 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

in the face, and put it out of countenance, by fair 
scripture and rational argument, they shall have my 
thanks ; and they will, 1 apprehend, better deserve 
the thanks of their friends, than any of their prede- 
cessors in this controversy. Let no one think that 
this is vain boasting. I claim not the discovery of 
these truths. Those venerable leaders in this con- 
troversy have wrought so effectually in the mine of 
truth, and so accurately laid its golden treasures 
before us, that we have only to take them up and 
use them. Nay, the eternal Spirit himself has con- 
descended in mercy to our weakness, to furnish us 
with the precious materials with which we are to 
erect and defend the temple of truth : and, that we 
may not fail in our undertaking, he still condescends 
to assist, by his dove-like operations, our mental 
powers, directs where to look, which to take, and 
■where to incorporate it in the building. But, if 
■our opponents will make wisdom and folly harmo- 
nize, righteousness and wickedness greet each oth- 
er, absurdity and consistency unite ; and prove that 
they all flow from the same fountain of eternal wis- 
dom, justice and truth, they w^ill have done what no 
one else ever did. When they will vindicate the 
claims of eternal justice, in conformity to any cor- 
rect perceptions we have of justice, in punishing 
those reprobates which Christ never had any inten- 
tion of saving when he died for them, and who ex- 
actly fulfill the counsel of his will ; and shew the 
harmony of this divine attribute with uncreated 
goodness and truth, and with the benevolent econ- 
omy of the Gospel, in conformity with their system 
of decrees, they will then have ushered into the 
moral world a flood of light to which it has always 
heretofore been a stranger ; — when this is done, 
this controversy shall end ; at least with me. And 
they are earnestly solicited to make the trial. The 
object is worthy of their attention. If we are not 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 89 

totally deceived, and our heart does not accuse us 
of insincerity, we most ardently desire to know the 
truth. It has been the object of our pursuit for a 
long time. If they have the truth, why should we 
not embrace it ? Certainly every prejudice, prepos- 
session, and party feeling, ought to be sacrificed 
upon its holy altar. 

3. We will now turn our attention to those sa- 
cred and venerable records of our salvation, to 
which we must ultimately appeal for a correct de- 
cision on all subjects of religious controversy. 

But before we enter this golden mine of eternal 
truth, It seems expedient to stop, and obviate an ob- 
jection of M;-. Williston's, which presents irseif at 
the entrance, and threatens to impede our progress. 
Speaking of the author of the * Errors of Hopkin- 
sianism,' he says, p. 18. " fic does not pretend to 
bring much direct proof from the Scriptures to 
shew that God has not a purpose about every event. 
He stj'ives hard by learned criticisms, and other 
means, to invalidate our direct proof" — There is, 
** great want of direct proof against tiie decrees" — 
? '^'therefore they choose to meet us in the field of 
reasfju^ rather than in that of revelation. Here 
they feel as if they had no difficulty in confronting 
us" — " Now they display a great zeal for the hon- 
our of God." Upon this quotation 1 would make 
first, a few general remarks. As to meeting the 
unconditional decretists in the field of reason, I 
think it is a field in which reasonabU beings delight 
to range, it being a rich pasture provided by ihe 
Author of our existence, to feed and strengthen our 
mental powers. And we would invite Mr. W. and 
his associates, to take a walk with us into this beau- 
litul field. He need not fear being associated with 
bad company. It has been frequented, not only by 
philosophers, astronomers, poets and statesmen, 
but also by divines, and those too of the most ex- 

H 2 



90 ON UJJIVERSAL DIVINE 

alted character. St. Paul ' reasoned with Felix on 
righteous, temperance, and a judgment to come,' 
Acts xxiv. 25. St. Peter said, 'And be ready al- 
ways to give an answer to every man that asketha 
reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and 
fear,' 1 Pet. iii. 15. And God said unto his ancient 
people, ' Come now, and let us reasori together.' 
Jsa. i. 18, It is true, Solomon saith, ' A sluggard 
is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can 
render a reason,' Prov. xxvi. 16. And to prove that 
he himself was not that sluggard, he observes, ' I 
applied my heart to know, and to search, and to 
seek out wisdom, and the reason of things,' Eccl. 
vii. 25, If God work all things, how natural for the 
carnal mfnd to indulge its ndiiive sluggishness, waLiti' 
ly conceiting that, inasmuch as the salvation of the 
elect is immutably secured, therefore there is noth- 
ing for him to do ; and so persuaded is he of the 
truth of his decrees, that all the correct reasoning 
in the universe, will not drive him from his conceit- 
ed " castle." 

However, with such sanctified examples before 
us, as God himself, Solomon, Isaiah, Paul and Pe- 
ter, who all meet us in the " field of reason," we 
need not dread the proscription of those who fear 
the light of reason will shine upon their opaque 
systems. The field of reason is ample. None are 
prohibited its entrance who bring their rational 
powers with them; who do not attempt to poison 
its springs with absurd dogmas, nor to open its. 
plains with the ploughshare of irresistible decrees^ 
nor pollute its limped waters v/ith the foreign mix- 
ture of an unconditional-conditional election, nor 
mow its meadows with the resistless scythe of fa- 
talism. Those who attempt to labour in this spa- 
cious field with such weapons, and for such ends^ 
will soon be banished from its verdant lawns, by its 
original Lord and proprietor. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 91 

But is not the adorable Author of the sacred scrip- 
tures, and the Author of reason in man, the same 
Being? And did he not design that those precious 
gifts should harmonize in their testimony ? Can true 
reason, when enlightened by the bright rays of 
eternal truth, contradict the infallible testimony of 
God in his word ? Are not ail the solemn declara- 
tions of God in his holy word, so many pointed ap- 
peals to the reason or understandings of men ? 
Nay, does he not condescend to reason with them 
on the justice, goodness, and propriety of his ways ? 
And what impropriety to appeal to beings who are 
incapable of understanding his words, or of per- 
ceiving the justice and equity, the wisdom and be- 
nevolence of his dispensations ! Of what use can 
revelation be to irrational minds ? Should man be 
induced to act an irrational part? Has not Mr. W. 
" laboured exceedingly," but in vain, to make his 
system harmonize with the reason and nature of 
things ? And does he hope to impose a system of 
doctrines upon rational beings, which contradicts 
all their rational conclusions ? What did the Pope 
more ? I know the assertors of Calvinistic decrees 
dread to bring their doctrine to the test of rational 
argument ; and yet, such is their inconsistency, 
they make sturdy efforts to reconcile their system 
to reason ; and plead, if Mr. W. says truly, for a 
greater degree of human liberty than we do. Why 
then does he object to follow us into the pleasant 
field of reason ? Is he afraid that the reader will 
discover so many exhilarating streams of truth, 
that he will turn with avidity and disgust, from the 
doleful castle of universal decrees ? O no ; says 
Mr. W. '• 1 do not refuse to follow my antagonist 
into his castle," p. 19. Indeed, sir, I am not in a 
castle. I have not fled from the open tield of rea- 
son, into a secret castle, or concealed myself be- 
hind the " secret will," for the purpose of avoiding 



92 QN UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

an open combat. If, however, (he being surround- 
ed by the rampart of scripture, and defended by 
the bastions of reason, will secure me from the 
bomb-shells of irresistible decrees, I am happy to 
occupy such a castle, to shelter me against the 
desperate onsets of so many champions, as seem to 
have marshalled themselves against me. Surround- 
ed by these invulnerable walls, by the strength of 
the Captain of my salvation, 1 hope to defend my- 
self. At any rate, 1 shall not resign myself a cap- 
live, until the bastions and ramparts are demolish- 
ed, and the citadel is taken. However well fortifi- 
ed Mr. W. may- think himself in bis old castle of 
decrees, it seems the javelin of truth has roused him. 
He has, he tells us, ventured into the field: but [ 
believe all who will read his book impartially, will 
conclude that he mistook the barren mountain of 
Calvinistic decrees for the prolific field of reason ; 
or, if he ventured to look from its lofty summit 
sometimes, the rising odours from the precious flow- 
ers of rational arguments, which so plentifully adorn 
the field of reason, inflated the organs of animal 
life so suddenly, that gasping for breath, he shrunk 
back with such precipitance, as prevented him 
from an impartial survey of this spacious field. 
The majestic river of universal love, issuing from 
the fountain of unbounded goodness, watering the 
plains of reason, the rivulets of rational argument, 
the opening flowers and ripening fruit of.Christiaa 
experience, with which rational souls were !oaded, 
all blithe and hearty, pouring out a reasonable sac- 
rijice^ and their/ree-zy/// offerings ; and in the mean 
time chanting so melodiously in ImmanuePs land 
the song5 of redeeming love^ — all these presented 
such a beautiful and variegated prospect, and echo- 
ed such a harmonious concert of sacred and ration- 
al music, that Mr. W. dare not associate himself 
with them, for fear of offending his old companions. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 93 

Instead of imitating the royal shepherd of Israel, by 
going to the flowing brook of truth, which fertilizes 
all the field of reason, and there filling his sling 
with the smooth stones of rational arguments, he 
J puts on his old coat of mail, and mounting the ram- 
part of his castle of decrees, bids defiance to the 
whole host of Arminians, Methodists, reasoners, 
&;r. Lifting his ponderous spear, he echoes the 
challenge : " Our opponents cannot but see, that 
we have much scripture, which seems naturally to 
support the d-fctriiie of a divine plan of creation, 
providence and grace." p. 19. Yes, we do see it. 
We never disputed but that there is much, -eery 
much scripture, and reason too, which declare that 
God is the Creator, provider, and gracious benefac- 
tor of -the human race : but we do not concede that 
he creates and provides sin for man to feed upon. 
But this is not Mr. W.'s castle, it is ours. And it 
was erected by the divine architect, founded in the 
immutable fitness of things, su-jportcd by the scrip- 
tures of eternal truth, and is perfectly consistent 
in the eye of enlightened reason. How came then 
Mr. W. to imagine himself in this fortified castle ? 
Did he attempt to climb up some other way ? Or 
does he mean this only as an outward appendage, to 
hide the dismal appearance of his hideous castle, 
the walls of which are so perforated with the balls 
of truth, that he thinks it no longer tenable ? Be- 
fore we attack him in earnest, we must dislodge 
him from the place we occupy. We cannot con- 
tend with him here. If he were in this sacred place 
we should find no difficulty in uniting in Christian 
harmony : for he must not suppose that we would 
be so imprudent as to bring scripture to prove that 
God is not the Creator, and the gracious Governor 
of the universe. We must, however, look else- 
where for our antagonist. 



04 ON UNirERSAL DIVINE 

But where shall we find him ? Secreted in the 
castle of universal decrees ? Though some have af- 
fected to impress such a sacredness upon this secret 
castle as should keep us at an awful distance from 
an impartial examination of its origin and struc- 
ture, yet we will venture to draw near with respect- 
ful steps, and take a concise view of this mighty 
edifice. *' What ! attempt an examination of the 
secret will of God P'' Excuse me, my friends; smce 
the depositaries of this secret have condescended 
to reveal it, we may be exempted from the charge 
ot sacrilege, if we presume to cast a respectful look 
at it, in order to ascertain, if possible, its true char- 
acter. 

Do you wish to know, then, where this fort is 
which is occupied by Mr. Williston — of what mate- 
rials it is made, and how defended? In respect to its 
scile^ I can say no more of it, than that it appears to 
have be^ formed by the stagnant waters of error, 
which haYe been accumulating ever since the days 
of Augustine, who opened an inlet from the turbid 
waters of heathen fatalism, into the Christian pool. 
A mighty stream flowed, from a similar source, inta 
it in the days of Calvin, Knox, and Ziiingle ; and 
it also received a great acquisition from the labours 
of Edwards, Toplady, and other champions of un- 
conditional reprobation. Hopkins endeavoured to 
drain off some of the mud of reprobation, and to 
put in its place the sand of a moral mahility, mixed 
with the clay of 2^ natural ability; but they not 
uniting according to his expectation, an awful 
chasm is left, which many of his followers have 
been attempting to fill up. The citadel of this 
mighty fort, at present is situated in New-England, 
at a place called Andover ; at which many a youth, 
panting for a morsel of bread, flee for refuge. For 
you must know that this fort has been so powerful- 
ly attacked at times, by some of the unpollished 



AGEKCY AND EFFICIENCY. 95 

tribe from the " field of reason," who, taking some 
of the rifles from the mountain of divine revelation, 
have fired such vollies of truth against its wails, 
that these young builders have been thrown into 
great perplexity. It is even said, that, to prevent 
actual despair, they have instituted a " charitable 
society," who, extending their benevolence to An- 
dover, prevent these unfortunate children of de- 
crees from falling victims to the direful efifecls of 
their own impolitic system of operations. Through 
these benevolent exertions of their pious friends, 
they are making mighty efforts to extend the do- 
minions of their " castle;" but meeting with such 
almost insurmountable difficulties, that you may see 
despair depicted upon many of their countenances. 
Sometimes the beautiful plains of gospel truth, the 
shining mountain of Christian holiness, the majestic 
stream of divine benevolence, the many rivulets of 
Christian sympathy towards their ref)robates, the 
high walls of God's commandments, the refreshing 
showers of gospel promises, and the fertilizing field 
of enlightened reason — all these present such bar- 
riers in their way, that they are at their wit's end 
how to proceed in accomplishing their purpos^e : 
at other times they meet such numerous bands of 
veteran troops, under the command of Immanuel, 
whose armour is divinely wrought, who have been 
exercised in the field of reason, and are so expert 
in wielding the sword of truth, the woid of God, 
which is their principal weapon of defence, that 
these builders are obliged to stop their |;rogre>s in 
building, to defend what they have already erected. 
And they have been so puzzled, that report saith, 
they have already held a consultation to determine 
on the expediency of altering iheir mode of defence, 
and of changing the front of their castle, that pas- 
sengers may not discover the offensive parts of it. 
One party concluded upon this inscription, Christ 



i 



96 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

died for all men ; which was accordingly written 
over the principal gate of the castle : The covenant 
of grace conditional^ was written underneath Uncon' 
ditional election and reprobation : M atural ability to 
love God without grace, preceded Moral inabiliti/, 
in the same line : Free moral agency followed Irre' 
sistible decrees, and Universal divine efficiency : Ob- 
ligation and duty of all men to be perfect, was in- 
scribed on the same stone, but rather obscurely, 
with Impossible to be perfect. In regard to the ma- 
terials with which they build, and the utensils with 
which they work, the reader may see a specimen 
of them in Mr. Williston's book ; but if he want a 
more ample assortment, he may find them in Cal- 
vin's Institutes, Westminster Confession of Faith, 
Saybrook Platform, Hopkins' Divinity, Emmons' 
and Williams' Sermons. If these do not satisfy 
his curiosity for new things, he may enter as a 
graduate into Andover School ; and, if possible, 
penetrate into the secrets of the committee who 
published the address of the charitable society for 
the education of indigent pious young men for the 
ministry. By this time perhaps he will have 
learned, that a strong and long cable is making, 
composed of political and religious materials so 
ingeniously mixed that you can hardly distinguish 
the one from the other : — this is to " undergird the" 
political " ship" in the time of a public storm :* 
that is, in plain English, it is to bind all parties as 
much as possible together, unite their suffrage in 
the national elections, obtain a majority in Con- 
gress in favour of unconditional decrees, and gratu- 
itous reprobation, establish themselves by law, and 
then 1 am not a prophet, nor the son of a pro- 
phet, or I would venture to predict the mighty re- 

* See the address of the Charitable Society for the Educa,- 
tion of pious young men for the ministry. 



AGENC^Y AND EFFICIENCY. 97 

suit. But before this strong Hopkinsian castle is 
finished, we hope to exhibit on the delightful field 
of reason, such heavenly wrought niaterials, direct 
from God's sacred magazine, as shall divert the at- 
tention of the public from that gloomy castle, and 
fix it upon that building which hath foundations, 
whose builder and maker is God,* 

* The reader Trill, it is hoped, pardon the metaphorical g-arb 
in which the preceding ob-ervations are clothed. The ideas, 
and the manner of expressing- them, were suggested by Mr. 
Williston's remarks respecting " the field of reason," and fol- 
lowing me " into my castle." In regard to the hint respecting 
their making efforts to establish themselves bi/ law, it is \vell 
known to have been a favour ile object among the Presbyte- 
rians, especially in New-England, for some tiine. Tiie etforts 
that were made, soon after the elevation of John Adams to 
the presidency of the United States, is doubtless fresh in the 
memory of many of our fellow-citizens, as well as the chagrin 
that was manifested on finding themselves disappointed. And 
whoever reads the address of the ' Charitable Society for the 
education of indigent pious young men for the ministry,' (which 
society is made up of some of the leading chai-acters in the 
Presbyterian Church in Connecticut and Massachusetts,) sign- 
ed hy'Lyman Beecher, and considers the <<meof its publication, 
cannot fail to peceive the same end contemplated. And al* 
though that address, on account of its being very offensive to 
many, was suppressed as much as possible, we still have reason 
to believe the ohjccL of it is by no means abandoned. 

U seems, indeed, like a forlorn hope, for any one to promise 
himself an exclusive religious establishment, in this country 
especially, where the principles of civil and religious liberty 
are so perspicuously presented to the public mind, and so well, 
and so generally understood. But changes less hkely, and 
fully as important have been effected by the art and ingenuity 
of men. It is hoped, however, that this country has not be- 
come so corrupt yet, as to demand such a scourge from God, 
as a religious establishment. There can be no harm, neverthe- 
less, for the people to be on their guard, by being awake to 
their true interests, lest, in an evil hour, tlieir rights and privi- 
leges be wrested from them. Such events are generally 
brought about by secret, slow, and insidious means. There 
can, indeed, be no other method used to effect this deprecated 
object in this country ; for any who should openly avow such a 
de&ign, would thereby completely prevent its accomplishment. 
May such a deplorable event never be witnessed in this happy 
land. 

That I am by no means singular in supposing efforts are 
used to effect a religious establishment, may be seen by the foi- 

l 



98 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

Not so, says Mr. W. " His direct proof against 
us in very slender." It is granted that we have no 
text which saitii in so many words, God has not de- 
creed all things ; or He does not work sin in the 
hearts of sinners ; sinners do not in ail their wicked 
actions fulfil the -counsel of God's will. And it is 
equally manifest that there is no scripture which 
saith, God has decreed all things ; or He does work 

lowing energetic remarks from the pen of the Rev. Mr. Chan- 
ning-, of Boston, Massachusetts, which I borrow from the Rev. 
Martin Rutter's second letter to the Rev, Francis Brown, pre- 
sident of Dartmouth College, p. 25. Mr. ChanniDg observes, 
" It is, I hope, from no feeling of party, but from a sincere re- 
gard to the religion of Christ, that I would rouse the slumbering' 
minds of this community to the dangers which hang over 
THEIR RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS. No power is SO rapidly ac- 
cumulated, or SO dreadfully abused as ecclesiastical power. It 
assails men with menaces of eternal woe, unless they submit, 
and gradually awes the most stubborn and strongest minds in- 
to subjection. I mean not to ascribe the intention of introdu- 
cing ecclesiastical tyranny to any class of Christians among us ; 
but, 1 believe that many, in the fervour of their zeal, which 
may be essentially virtuous, are about to touch with unhallow- 
ed hands the ark of God, to support Christianity by measures 
which its mild and charitable spirit abhors. 1 believe that ma- 
ny, overlooking the principles of human nature, and the histo- 
ry of the church, are about to set in motion a spring, of which 
they know not the force, and cannot calculate the effects ! I 
believe that the seed of spiritual tyranny is sown, and al- 
though to a careless spectator, it may seem the ' smallest of all 
seeds,' it has yet, wittim itself, a fatal principle of increase, 
and may yet darken this region of our country with its 

DEADLY branches." 

TJiose pious ministers and people of other denominations, 
who, with us, deprecate the coming of such a hostile foe to civil 
and rehgious liberties, will not apply these strictures to them- 
selves, but will use their influence to prevent the growth of this 
*' deadly^ ^ tree of " spiritual tyranny. ^^ 

Mr. Brown, indeed, in his reply to Mr. Rutter, intimates, that 
if ever their should be an ecclesiastical establishment in this 
country, the Methodists will claim it. 1 hope he is the only 
one who indulges such a sentiment. If we had ever sought 
after it, had ever intermeddled with civil affairs, and used any 
measures to oppress others, there might be just grounds to ap- 
prehend such an event. But all who know any thing of our 
economy, know that we abhor all civil interference in pre- 
scribing in religious matters. For one, I should rather si/^er 
yviih th^ persecutedy ihd^a triumph with the persecutors. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 99 

sin in the hearts of sinners to make them fulfil his 
will. So far then iVe stand upon equal ground. 

As they affirm, and we deny, we are called upon 
to prove a negative, which is not always practica- 
ble : and, 1 believe every impartial man must ac- 
knowledge that on a disputed question, when no 
direct testimony is brought to prove the affirmative, 
those who deny are under no obligation to bring 
direct testimony to disprove the litigated question. 
If a person is accused of any crime, he stands ac- 
quitted, if he pleads not guilty, until the accusation 
is substantiated by competent testimony : he is un- 
der no obligation to bring testimony to prove him- 
self innocent. Now, we think that we have invali- 
dated, not merely by " learned criticisms," but by 
a fair, liberal, and just interpretation of God's 
word, all the testimony Mr. W. has brought in fa- 
vour of his position. Of this, however, we would 
not be our own judges. We submit, without any 
anxiety, the decision of the question to those whose 
bigotry has not eaten up their candour. Under this 
conviction, we do not think ourselves under any 
obligation to bring direct testimony to vindicate 
ourselves, until their direct proof is brought to con- 
demn us ; and then, indeed, our vindication will be 
unnecessary. 

Perhaps a very good reason may be offisred why 
the sacred scriptures have not, in so many words, 
contradicted the assertion, that God is the efficient 
cause of sin, or that he worketh it in the hearts of 
sinners. This horrid sentiment, so dishonourable 
to God, probably was not advanced by the ene- 
mies of revelation in the days of the inspired wri- 
ters ; and therefore, it was needless to contradict 
it. That they inculcated sentiments very near akia 
to it, is [jresumable from the spirited manner in 
which some of the inspired penmen have refuted 
such calumnies. The preceding observations are 



100 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

not made to excuse ourselves from the labour of 
disproving the position of Mr. W. that God worketh 
wickedness /"* For although from the customary 
rules of argumentation we might be excused, yet 
for the sake of exhibiting the whole truth as it is in 
Jesus, we will lay before the reader, a few out of 
the many texts which might be adduced, accompa- 
nied with such remarks as are thought expedient, 
leaving it to him to determine whether they can be 
reconciled with the doctrine of a universal divine 
efficiency. 

* And the Lord said unto Cain — And now art thou 
cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth 
to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand ; when 
thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield 
unto thee her strength ; a fugitive and vagabond 
shalt thou be in the earth.' Gen. iv. 9, 10, 11. 
Can any one seriously believe that God wrought 
efficiently upon Cain's heart, and caused him to 
will the death of his brother Abel ? that God irre- 
sistibly compelled Cain to this horid murder, by 
laying him under the invincible constraint of a mo» 
ral inability to do good ? by giving him an inclina- 
iion which, on account of his moral inability he 
could not counteract, led him to premeditate, and 
finally to execute the murder of his brother ? Is 
such a sentiment compatible with either justice or 
goodness ? Hear the awful thunder of God's inflex- 
ible justice ! The voice of thy brother'' s bloody crieth 

* Perhaps some may think this expression is too strong-.f But 
if God work all things, and if wickedness is worked at all, then 
he must work it. If an action, which is apparently wicked, 
loose its character of wickedness, on account of the ag-ent who 
produces it, and if God work all things, then there is no such 
thing" as wickedness in the universe. But wickedness confess- 
edly exists ; and Hopkinsianism declares in categ-orical terms, 
that God works all thing's ; therefore tliat doctrine, by inevita- 
ble consequence, declares that God works wickedness. And 
this single consideration stamps the doctrine with the iadelia>r- 
fele impression of the most horrid blasphemy. 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 101 

unto me from the ground. And now art thou curS" 
ed, (^c. Cursed I For what ? Why, according to 
JVfr. W. for having been the passive instrument of 
fulfi !■:■ ' the unalterable counsel of God. Forhav- 
in>^ ;: . vered the end of his existence. If Cain 
had been initiated into the modern doctrine of de- 
crees, how forcibly might he have pleaded an ar- 
rest of the judgment pronounced upon him. 'Why, 
O my God ! must I be doomed to wander a fugitive 
upon the earth, and be denied its fruits ? Must all 
this come upon me, because I did not rise up against 
omnipotence, and frustrate with my puny arm, the 
counsels of eternal wisdom ? My mind was entirely 
under the irresistible control of thy secret power 
and will. Thou didst excite the desire of revenge 
in my heart, and directed that desire to the object 
of my envy — my hrother'^s blood. And I could no 
more have resisted the secret impulse of thy Al- 
mighty power, than I can raise my dead brother to 
life — And must 1, O my merciful judge — must I suf- 
fer thy vengeance for having fulfilled the purposes 
of thy mind ? May not this consideration of having 
contributed by that murderous act to the " perfec- 
tion of the universe," mitigate my punishment a lit- 
tle V But if Cain had been templed to any such 
plea, a recollection of what God had before said, 
would have closed his lips. * Why art thou wroth ? 
and why is thy countenance fallen ? If thou doest 
well, shalt thou not be accepted V ver. 6, 7. If any 
who believe in universal decrees, can, consistently 
with his principle, reconcile such tender expostu- 
lations with the sincerity of Jehovah ; and such sin- 
gular punishments as were inflicted upon Cain, with 
his untarnished ^'u^/ice, he will have rendered an es- 
sential service to his cause. 

' And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it 
was corrupt : for all flesh had corrupted his way 
upon the earth. And God said unto Noah. The 

i2 



102 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

end of all flesh is come before me ; for the earth is 
filled with violence through them : and behold I 
will destroy them with the earth.' Gen. vi. 12, 13. 
Were these devoted antediluvians destined to utter 
destruction for not preventing the Almighty from 
fulfilling the good pleasure of his will in them ? for 
not preventing Him from working efficiently in their 
hearts, all that corruption and violence of which they 
had been the mere passive instruments ? Suppose 
ihey had made an effort to obey the warning voice 
of Noah ; could they have resisted omnipotence ? 
^vho passed a decree before they were born, that 
they should be wicked. Nay, more, according to 
Mr. W. their wicked characters were formed as 
they were by the efficient hand of God ; and then, 
"because they were so formed, and so compelled to 
do, they were washed from the earth by an over- 
whelming flood ! Do such glaring inconsistencies 
need direct testimony to prove that they belong not 
to the economy of God ? 

* Cursed be Canaan , a servant of servants shall 
he be unto his brethren.' ch. ix. 25. Will, the 
Lord curse the work of his own hands ? " He work- 
£th all things'^'' says Mr. W. Consequently he work- 
ed in the heart of Ham the father of Canaan, mov- 
€d the volition of his mind, and produced the indis- 
creet desire in his heart to expose the nakedness of 
his father ; and all this was in perfect conformity 
to the primary intention, and unalterable determi- 
nation of God 5 and yet his unfortunate descen- 
<iants must be cursed for it. O how this dreadfal 
doctrine dishonours the God of universal benevo- 
jence. ' Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and 
upon Gomorrah fire and brimstone from the Lord 
out of heaven.' ch. xix. 24. For what? Poor un- 
happy men ! Doomed to utter destruction for being, 
and for passively doing w^hat they could no more 
have avoided J than they coul(^ have arrested the 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 10 



o 



movement of the planetary system and have stopt 
* its rapid wheels' in their progress. ' Thus God 
rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he 
did unto his Father, in slaying his seventy breth- 
ren : And all the evil of the men of Shechem did 
God render upon their heads.' Judges ix. 56, 57. 
That is, according to our opponent, God rewarded 
ihem in vengeance for having fulfilled his decree, 
and for having performed his secret will. Let 
those who can swallow such crude indigestible con- 
trarieties, gormadize their mental appetites to the 
full. They may find a plentiful feast, which has 
been, some of it at least, served up, long since the 
days of the reformation, in Mr. W.'s vindication of 
Hopkinsian decrees. ' The Lord trieth the righte- 
ous ; but the wicked, and him that loveth violence, 
his soul hateth.'^ Ps. xi. 5. Mr. W. asserts that 
God formeth wicked, yea all wicked characters. 
And the royal Psalmist saith, that the Lord hateth 
the wicked. Does He hate the work of his own 
hands ? What an adept, is this vindicator of reform- 
ed doctrines, at contradicting the Almighty. How- 
ever, " His heart meaneth not so :" he only means 
to establish his system. If one half of the Bible 
is sacrificed, it must fall a victim to this all-devour- 
ing Lion of irresistible decrees. ' These six thinejs 
doth the Lord hate ; yea, seven are an abomination 
unto him : A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands 
that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviscth 
wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running 
to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and 
him that sowelh discord among brethren.' Prov. 
vi.l6 — 20. All these seven sins, the Lord not only 
hateth^ but they are an abomination to him. Con- 
trast Solomon and Mr. W. Mr. W. " God work- 
eth all things"^^ — " all things are according to his 
pleasure ;' Solomon. There are seven abominations 
which the wicked inork : and all these seven abomina- 



104 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

tions the Lord hatefh. It might, perhaps, be deem- 
ed impertinent to ask the reader in which of these 
testimonies he will confide. But I would ask him, 
^s a reasonable man, to tell us how far the above 
words of Solomon are removed from a direct 3.nd 
positive proof against Mr. Williston's doctrine : Is 
it "very slender?" 

But more of a similar character, furnished by the 
same infinitely wise Spirit, is at hand. ' 1 hate the 
work of them that turn aside' — from another's argu- 
ments think ye ? Ps. ci. 3. ' I hate robbery for burnt 
offerings,'' Isa. Ixi. 8. ' I hate^ 1 despise your feast 
days,' Amos v. 21. 'Thou ^ct^e^^ all workers of 
iniquity,' Ps. v. 5. ' But this thou hast, that thou 
hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which ^/a^5o 
hate,^ Rev. ii.6. All these texts prove, as point- 
edly as any thing can be proved, that the Lord 
God hateth sin of every kind. But Mr. W. to avoid 
their force, makes a distinction, not known in the 
word of God, that although he does not delight in 
sin on its own account, yet he takes pleasure in it 
on account of its being productive of good. If he 
will bring one text to prove that sin ever did any 
good, or that God takes pleasure in unrighteous- 
ness on any account, we will then, and not till then 
admit his distinction, and believe in his doctrine. 
'As saith the proverb of the ancients, Wicked- 
ness proceedeth from the wicked.' 1 Sam. xxiv. 13, 
Let us ask Mr. W. where wickedness proceeds 
from ? Ans. God''s agency is employed, " In bring- 
ing all this wrath of man into existence," p. 256, 
I suppose it will not be disputed that the wrath of 
man is wickedness, or that he who forms a wicked 
character is the author of that character ; but, ac- 
cording to the scheme now opposed, God forms 
wicked characters, and is the " effectuating cause" 
of the wrath of man. Apply the proverb, wickedness 
proceedeth from the wicked^ to this doctrine j and, if 



AGENCY AND EFFICIExNCY. 105 

(he proverb is true, he who forms wicked charac- 
ters, and effectuates wrath in the hearts of men, is a 
wicked being. On a former occasion, we saw how 
Mr. W.'s doctrine swept all unholiness from the 
universe. Now, a more melancholy devastation is 
beheld, namely, all holiness is taken from the Dei- 
ty. ' Is there unrighteousness with God ? God for ; 
bid.' Rom. ix. 14. This is, not only ^changing 
the glory of the incorrupiible God into an image, 
made like to corruptible man ^ but it is changing 
him into the image of (he God of this world, who is 
emphatically styled (he roaring lion, zcho goelh 
about seeking whom he may devour, ' Wo unlo 
theiii (hat call evil good, and good evil ; that put 
darkness for light, and light for darkness ; that put 
bit(er for sweet, and sweet for bitter.' Isai. v. 20. 
J know not how good and evil, light and darkness, 
hitlf^y ixnd sweet, can be more completely componnd- 
ed, and more pcrfectlv referred to the same source, 
than is done by Mr, Williston. That it is not his 
intention to represent the infinitely wise and holy 
God, as foolish and unholy, we readily adnit ; but 
that his inconsistent doctrine does this in the most 
conclusive manner, must, I think, be admitted by 
all impartial men. It is hoped, however, that he 
will not continue to close his eyes upon the light of 
truth, after being convinced of his error. If he 
should be so unwise, 1 will venture to remind him 
of one more caution—* Wo to him' — that ' take 
away the righteousness of the righteous from him.' 
Isa. V. 23. If our antagonist is determined to de- 
prive the sinner of all his accountable sinfulness, 
•we beseech him to spare the adorable Author of 
our existence, and not strip him of his essential 
holiness. 

' Let no man say, when he is tempted, I atn 
tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with 
evil, neither tempteth he any man. But every mari 



106 eN UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, 
and enticed.' James i. 13,14. That the Apostle 
in these words, designed to refute the idea, that 
God excited men to moral evil, is manifest from 
the context : for, that very evil to which he had 
asserted God could not be tempted, in the next 
verse he declares originates from men's desire, 
which brings forth sin. And, in opposition to those 
who would insinuate that this evil originates from 
God, the Apostle, in verse 17, affirms, that ' Every 
good gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, 
and Cometh down from the Father of lights.' And 
lest some might say that he was mutable, sometimes 
forming righteous, and sometimes unrighteous char- 
acters, the holy apostle adds, ' With whom there 
is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.' — 
' The righteous Lord' invariably ' loveth right- 
eousness, and hateth iniquity.' The same immuta- 
ble property of the divine Being is exhibited by the 
apostle John ; ' God is light, and in him is no 
darkness at all.' 1 John i. 5. 

Now, I think that these testimonies of St. James 
and St. John, are direct and positive evidence 
against the doctrine of Mr. W. A man, indeed, 
must rack his ingenuity to reconcile them with that 
doctrine which makes God the efficient author of 
sin ; and which represents him, as foreordaining, 
secretly influencing, and directly forming wicked 
characters : and also declares that all things, all 
these wicked characters, Avith all their motives,^ 
designs, and wicked works, are according to his 
counsel, perfectly pleasing to his mind and will. 

' Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeih 
NOT EVIL and good.' Lam. iii. 38. How then can 
God be the efficient cause, or the figurative foun- 
tain of mQral evil ? Ts not this text a direct and ex- 
plicit proof against the doctrine we are opposing? 
^Doth d. fountain send forth at the sameplacej sweet 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 107 

ttflfer and bitter P — So cOin 7io fountain both yield 
salt water and fresh.' Janaes iii. 11, 12. Here it is 
expressly affirmed that no fountain, either natural 
or moral, human or divine, can send forth at the 
same time both pure and impure streams ; that is, 
God cannot, consistently with his attributes, be the 
fontal or efficient cause of moral evil. And to put 
the question beyond all dispute respecting God 
being the cause, or figurative fountain of moral evil, 
our apostle, after having warned his brethren, in 
verse 14, against ' bitter envying and strife in their 
hearts^'* says, ' This wisdom descendeth not from 
above, but is earthly, sensual and devilish,^ ver. 25. 
And in verse 17 he contradistinguishes this earthly, 
sensual, and devilish envying and strife, from the 
* wisdom coming from above, which is first /?Mre, 
then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full 
of mercy Q.nd good fruits,"^ In these words, St. 
James affirms flatly, and in the most unequivocal 
manner, that God is not, in any sense, the cause, 
source, or fountain of moral evil, such as envying 
and strife: on the contrary, this cometh fiom beneath, 
from the earth, from the sensual hearts of sinners, 
from the Devil. And that no one might misunder- 
stand him, he proceeds to show what does come 
from God, namely, that which is pure, in opposition 
to impure desires ; that which is gentle, Sic. in op- 
position to strife, &c. 1 do not see how we could 
desire more direct and positive testimony against 
Mr. W. than this of St. James. And therefore we 
will now leave it to the reader to determine, wheth- 
er our direct proof against his doctrine, " is very 
slender." If the bible does not contradict itself, 
and if there is but one solitary text, which, upon a 
fair construction, contradicts his doctrine, then the 
whole tenor of God's word is against that doctrine : 
and, of course, there can be none in favour of it. — 
This, indeed, is really the case. From an im- 



108 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

partial survey of the sacred scriptures, it Tvill 
appear manifest to every attentive observer, that 
the grand design of revelation is, to vindicate the 
character of its sacred Author from the false impu- 
tations of his enemies who might charge him with 
injustice, unmercifuhiess, and unholiness. And that 
the scheme of doctrine which we are now opposing, 
by necessary inference, tarnishes His adorable 
character, with those capital defects, has, 1 believe, 
been abundantly proved in the preceding pages : 
Therefore that doctrine is contrary to the general 
tenor of God's word. This shews the perfect har- 
mony of sacred scripture with enlightened reason. 
Yes, it is the flowing stream of revelation, which 
waters, and fertilizes all the " field of reason." 
Those therefore who walk circumspectly in this 
spacious field, under the enlightening beams of the 
Sun of righteousness, will be directed to this flow- 
ing fountain of eternal truth; where they will re- 
fresh their weary spirits with its exhilarating 
streams ; and, feeling their mental powers invigor- 
ated, they will delightfully behold that the same 
God who gave the revelation of his will in the holy 
scriptures, gave to man reason to perceive its con- 
sistency with itself, and its sacred harmony with 
the nature and fitness of things. Guided, as I hum- 
bly tr^ist, by the influence of this truth, I will now 
lay before the reader some more of the unhappy 
consequences of Mr. Williston's system. And, in 
doing this, I hope also to shew how scripture and 
reason harmonize. 

1. One weighty objection against Mr» Williston's 
scheme, and which was mentioned in my letters to 
him, is. That it sets the decrees and commands in 
battle array against each other. This objection 
he not only admits, but endeavours to shew that 
such contrariety is perfectly consistent. See his 
book, p. 42— 45« And to make its consistency 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 109 

apparent, it is said that the decrees are the rule of 
God's conduct, and the commands the rule^ of our 
duty. Indeed, this distinction might be admitted, 
were the decrees confined within scriptural bounds : 
but being let loose by the Hopkinsian theology, 
they overflow the banks of gospel truth, taking in 
their rapid course such a universal sweep, that eve- 
ry thing, commands, promises, and threatenings, 
are washed from the world. God has decreed the 
decrees, his own purposes, commands, and promis- 
es ; and likewise decreed that the reprobates 
should neither obey the commands, avoid the 
threatenings, nor believe in the promises. In fact, 
whether the commands are obeyed or disobeyed,, 
the object of the decree is equally eflccted : for, 
nothing great or small either in the physical or 
moral world, can elude the all-comprchen^ve grasp 
of Hopkinsian decrees. Now, what becomes of 
the above distinction ? Is it not perfectly nominal ? 
If God's conduct is regulated by the decrees, and 
if the decrees are universal in their operation, then 
every thing good and bad is effected by the decree : 
of consequence, God, by. the operation of his own 
decree, breaks his own commandments. He, by 
force of his decree, or by his own efficiency, 
opposes, and influeixes sinners to oppose, and vio- 
late the precepts of his ov/n law. If this inference 
be denied, then the doctrine of a universal divine 
efficiency is given up ; but if it be admitted, thea 
the above distinction is declared nugatory. 

Let us now look at the fatal effects of that doc- 
trine. God commands all men every where to re- 
pent. There stands an impenitent sinner. The 
minister of the Lord Jesus enforces the above com- 
mand upon him. If a believer in this doctrine of 
decrees, he may justly reply, ' God, who decreed 
and brings to pass all thin^^s, has decreed and ef- 
fected my impenitence.' Nay, but he has com- 



110 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

manded you to repent. * Truly ; but his decrees 
and commands are opposed to each other ; and his 
decrees being immutalDle, and the invariable rule 
by which he regulates his own conduct, and per- 
fectly pleasing to ,him, he has determined I shall 
not obey the command. And even if I would, I 
cannot, unless he has decreed I shall ; but that he 
has not so decreed, is evident from my present in- 
disposition to repent : this is a certain indication to 
me, that I am under the influence of the decree, 
which is in opposition to the command.' But the 
command is the rule of your duty ; therefore you 
ought to obey it. ' Nay, but the decree is the rule 
of God?s duty ; and therefore he ought and will, 
and does enforce it, for 1 now feel its effects in my 
present inability to comply with the command.' 
How can. such objections be obviated by the assert- 
ers of this strange doctrine ? They cannot say in 
truth, that they originate from an abuse of their 
scheme : for, this is not abusing it, but using it ac- 
cording to the license it gives ; all such objections 
flow as naturally from it, as the rays of light do 
from the sun. 

Make an experiment of the opposite doctrine, 
which makes the decrees and commands of God 
harmonize. God has commanded all men every 
where to repent ; and he has decreed to afford all 
men every where all proper assistance to enable 
them to comply with the command. Let the min- 
ister of God enforce this doctrine upon an impeni- 
tent sinner ; what can he say ? Me has no excuse 
unless he abuse the doctrine. He cannot say truly, 
that he has not power to repent ; for the decree of 
God by which he regulates his own conduct, has 
furnished the sinner with power. Neither can he 
say in truth, that God did not design he should re- 
pent ; because his design is fully manifested by the 
command : there is no secret will, no private de- 



4 

AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. Ill 

cree of God behind the curtain, which prevents the 
sinner from obeying the command. He cannot 
say, there has been no provision made for him ; be- 
cause Jesus Christ tasted death for every man : 
Nor yet, that God is not willing he should be sav- 
ed ; because the willingness of God to save sin- 
ners, has been demonstrated by the gift of Christ, 
and by the solemn declaration of God himself, that 
he is not willmg any should perish. Neither can 
the impenitent sinner excuse himself by saying, 
there is no necessity of repentance ; for God hath 
said, ' Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise per- 
ish.' Nor can the sinner justly presume upon to- 
morrow ; because God has said, ' My Spirit shall 
not always strive with man' — ' To-day, if you will 
hear his voice, harden not your hearts.' Now 
what just excuse can the sinner find in this doctrine ? 
Does not the cord of truth bind him hand and foot, 
not leaving him even the limb of an excuse by 
which he can cling to the pillars of carnal security ? 
And does he, after being strij)t of all his unscrip- 
tural excuses, throw himself as a condemned sin- 
ner, at the foot of the cross, crying, help me, O my 
God ! For Christ's sake, have mercy upon me, O 
my Father — save me from this mighty load of con- 
demnation under which I groan ! While this peni- 
tent sinner thus pleads the merits of Christ, look- 
ing to him by faith, God the Father shines upon 
him in the face of Jesus Christ, sheds abroad his 
Jove in his heart, saying unto him, Live, Thus has 
the doctrine of truth surrounded the sinner, disarm- 
ed him of all his defensive weapons, brought him a 
willing captive to the Lord Jesus, persuaded him 
to beg for mercy as a condemned criminal ; and 
finally ravished him with a believing view, and 
with a reviving taste of redeeming love. — While 
the opposite doctrine leaves the impenitent sinner 
as it found him, (unless he be irresistibly conquer- 



112 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

ed by Almighty power) furnishes him with weapons 
of defence, arms him with arguments against the 
design and willingness of God to save him, gives 
him no certain evidence that Christ ever loved 
him, though he died for him ; thus confirming him 
in his infidelity, and giving him just cause to con- 
clude that God is an hard Master^ who requires 
impossibilities of his creatures, and who punishes 
them with everlasting destruction, for not altering 
the unalterable determinations of God. 

Again : God has prohibited by his commands, 
idolatr3% Sabbath-breaking, profane swearing, ly- 
ing» stealing, adultery, &;c. &;c. But, according to 
the scheme now opposed, He has decreed, and by 
an efficient operation brings all these things to 
pass; and they are therefore in perfect conformity 
to his own good pleasure. Look around — see per- 
haps three fifths of mankind sunk in the grossest 
idolatry, and degraded by the most obscene rites, 
and sensual gratifications ; while, in the christian 
world, perhaps, three fourths, are not only desti- 
tute of the experience and practice of Christianity, 
but are at open war with its self-denying doctrines : 
all this idolatry, and all this inexcusable defection 
from the precepts of the gos^pel, according to our 
opponents, are brought into existence by the divine 
efficiency, in direct opposition to God's most holy 
commandments. Now I ask, and J appeal to e\e^' 
ry man of common understanding for the correct- 
ness of the sentiment, does not God, according to 
this doctrine, oppose, and by his own efficient op- 
eration, violate his own commands ! All idolatry, 
and every other abomination, though expressly 
prohibited by God himself, is, nevertheless, not 
only decreed, but also, in conformity to the pur- 
pose of God, brought to pass, and effected by the 
efficient working of God on the human heart. So 
says Hopkinsianism — and by so saying, it stamps 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 113 

itself with the most glaring, and palpable absurdi- 
ty. How would the heathen world be astonished, 
were they informed that all the past abominations 
of their ancestors, and all their present systems of 
idolatry, were the effect of God's eternal decree, 
and, on the whole, for the best, and therefore well- 
pleasing to God ! Would such arguments recom- 
mend Christianity to them ? Induce them to re- 
nounce their idolatry and embrace another system? 
Should not every friend to Christianity, who sighs 
for the conversion jf the heathen, use his influence 
to prevent such sentiments fiom being propagated 
among them ? Were they admitted, would they not 
totally eclipse the peculiar glories of Christianity, 
and furnish the benighted heathens with an excuse 
for all their abominations ? May the penetrating 
beams from the Sun of Righteousness be so widely 
diffused, that the darkening mists of error may 
every where be dissipated, and tiie sacred harmony 
of truth every where be seen. 

2. Another most fatal consequence of this doc- 
trine is, that It di.^arms the minister of the Lord Je- 
sus, of all his arguments to convict the sinner of his 
guilt. One grand design of the gospel is, to vindi- 
cate- the claims of God's righteous law against the 
sinner ; to exhibit its just requirements ; and to fix 
the criminality of sin exclusively upon the sinner 
himself. But the doctrine now opposed, prevents 
the accomplishment of this design, by transfering 
the whole responsibility of the sinner's conduct, to 
the Author of his existence. For, how can a man 
be guilty for having submitted to the eflcct of de- 
teruiinations whicii were made before he was born, 
and which were effected independent of his choice ? 
That man's responsible agency is totally annihilat- 
ed by this scheme, is manitest even from Mr. W.'s 
ineffectual attempt to reconcile them together. — 
Here stands a man accused with a breach of the 

K 2 



114 ON UiVIVKRSAL DIVINE 

moral law : supposing him a consistent believer in 
univ ersal divine efficiency, how will you convict 
him of guilt ? He may say, * the decree which had 
for its object, the greatest sum af good to the 
universe, has had its accomplishment in all my ac- 
tions : why then should I be condemned '?' But the 
law condemns you. ' Truly ; but the decree is 
opposed to that law ; and are they not both right ? 
And if both right, how could my actions have been 
wrong ? Besides, must I be accountable for actions, 
which were brought into existence by a present 
exciting agency, and an efficient operation of the 
Almighty ?' All such objections are licensed by the 
doctrine we oppose, it furnishes every transgres- 
sor with all such excuses for his wicked conduct. 
And here we may remark, that, inasmuch as all 
guilt is destroyed, so the necessity of pardon . is 
superceded. Redemption, and all its benefits are 
devoured by this rapacious foreigner, universal 
decree. To quote scripture or to use arguments 
to prove that mankind are guilty, is entirely need- 
less ; because no one will dispute its truth ; and, 
it is equally manifest that the system, which, by 
necessary inference exculpates man from bjape, is 
unscriptural and irrational ; therefore unworthy of 
belief. 

3. A third insuperable objection against the 
Hopkinsian scheme is, that it has impelled them to 
set aside one of the most evident axioms in moral 
science, namely, That the character of a cause is to 
be ascertained from the effects which ar^ produced* 
Every one who has attended to this subject knows, 
that this is one of the most popular arguments to 
to prove the existence and perfections of Deity, 
And it is sanctioned by the highest authority .: the 
inspired penmen have sanctified its use, ' The 
heavens declare the glory of God : and the firma- 
ment sheweth his handy work. Day unto day ut- 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 115 

tereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowl- 
edge.' Pslam xix. 1, 2. Here the royal Psalmest 
declares, that the glory of God is exhibited by the 
beauty, order, and magnitude of the luminaries of 
heaven : and that his infinite knowledge is demon- 
strated in the continual succession of day and 
night. 

From the original perfection of the world, the 
manifest adaption of all its parts to answer their 
end, the order, harmony, and admirable symmetry 
so visible throughout the whole, we infer the Al- 
mighty power, infinite wisdom, and unbounded 
goodness of the adorable Creator- So also, from 
the exact conformity of the divine law to the rela- 
tion of moral beings to each other, the precision 
with which the nature and extent of moral duties is 
discriminated, the perspicuous account of the cre- 
ation in its original perfection, the manner in w-hich 
moral evil was introduced, thereby carrying the 
mind to the fountain of human misery, are all so 
accurately traced in the sacred scriptures. — from 
these data we justly infer that these scriptures were 
given by inspiration of God. The infinite exacti- 
tude with which the scheme of redemption is suiled 
tQ the moral condition of man in his present state of 
degradation, its aptitude to restore him to the lost 
image of God, ils admirable, conformity to the 
guilty state of man as a fallen being, the purity and 
excellence of its doctrines and prtcepts 5 all ihese 
indicate the characters of wisdom and benevolence 
in the Author of this glorious plan of Redemption. 
And indeed this argument may be considered one 
of the l^rongest internal evidences of the divine au- 
thority of the law and the gospel Predictions 
verified by events, miracles well attested, the re- 
cords of which are found in the holy scriptures, 
also indicate the presence and operation of a divine 
hand. In all these instances, and manj more, 



116 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

which might be mentioned, the character of the 
cause is ascertained from the effects produced, ac« 
cording to the above axiom. But Mr. W. by de- 
nying the truth of the axiom, destroys one of the 
most correct and infallible data, from which we may 
infer the existence and perfection of God, and the 
truth and divine authority of the sacred scriptures* 
St. PauL also, used the same argument in his 
epistle to the Romans, to prove that the heathen 
philosophers were without excuse for unrighteously 
hiding the truths respecting the being and attributes 
of God, from the common people: for changing, 
by their systems of philosophy and schemes of the- 
ology, ' the glory of the incorruptible God, into an 
image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, 
and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.' This 
human policy, the apostle declares to have been 
foolishness. That they had sufficient means, to 
have led them to a different conclusion, respecting 
the character of God, the apostle affirms in these 
words 5 ' For the invisible things of him from the 
creation of the world are clearly seen, being un- 
derstood by the things that are made, even his 
eternal power and Godhead ; so that they are with- 
out excuse : Because when they knew God, thpy 
glorified him not as God, neither were thankful, but 
became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish 
hearts were darkened.' Rom. i. IB — 23. Deny- 
ing, it is probable, the truth of the axiom, that the 
character of a cause is inferable from its effects, 
and adopting as the basis of their philosophy the 
doctrine oifate^ iheW foolish hearts were so darken- 
ed that they vainly imagined that the infinitely glo- 
rious Creator was like to corruptible man, possess- 
ing passions and propensities like him in his pre- 
sent state of moral degradation ; and hence they 
concluded the gods v/ere the fountain, fontal^ or 
efficient cause of all evil, as well as good. Thus 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 117 

does the doctrine of the Hopkinsians, and the doc- 
trine of these heathen philosophers amalgamate. — 
See the reasoning of Mr. W. on this subject ex- 
posed, p. 66 — 75 of this work. 

But, as the truth of this maxim has been denied, 
by oiber Hopkinsian writers besides Mr. W. it may 
not be amiss to exhibit its truth by other illubtra- 
tions. Examine then that book. Do you discov- 
er signs of genius, strength of intellect, correct 
taste, and an improved mind ? Do you not hence 
conclude the author was a man of genius, and of im- 
proved intellectual powers ? But why ? Because an 
efff^ct partakes of the likeness of its cause. Study 
that constitution by whose principles the people 
are governed. Are they just ? Are the persons, 
property, characters and privileges of tbe subjects 
secured ? Are the natural, civil, and religious 
rights of the citizens guarded ? Are the various 
relative duties of ruler and ruled, master and ser- 
vant, &;c. &:c. discrimitiated ? and the aevrrbl de- 
partments of government duly balanced, guarded, 
and directed in their operation to the ultimate good 
of the whole, and of every individual ? And do you 
not from hence conclude that this constitution was 
designed, framed, and adopted by wise and good 
men ? But why draw this inference ? Because an 
effect partakes of the likeness of its cause. Exam^ 
ine that piece of mechanism. Is it imperfect, not 
answering its end? unfit for use? What then is 
your conclusion ? Why, that a novice has been at 
work. And this just inference is founded on the 
truth of the axiom, that an effect partakes of the 
likeness of its cause. Do you discover manifest 
imperfections in the present disordered state of the 
world? What is the conclusion? ' An enemy hath 
done this.' It is not now as it was once. These 
characteristics of imperfection, sin, ignorance, er- 
ror, woe and death, manifestly indicate, that some 



118 ©N UNIVERSAL DIVINE 

wicked agent hath been at work. So the maxim 
saith — and so also saith the sacred scriptures — 
' God made man upright, but he hath sought out 
many inventions.' But the Hopkinsians, by deny- 
ing the truth of the maxim, have refered all these 
evils to God, as their efficient cause ! And how 
pointedly do they thereby contradict the scriptural 
account of the agency of wicked men and devils. 
What monster has slaughtered thousands of inno- 
cent children, overturned and desolated provinces 
and kingdoms, and carried devastation and death 
with him ? Why, according to Mr. W. who denies 
the truth of our maxim, all this may have been 
done by some kind, generous, and humane agent. 
If an effect do not partake of the likeness of its 
cause, it is no proof that Herod was wicked be- 
cause he murdered the innocent babes of Bethle- 
hem ; no, nor that Pharaoh was a tyrant, because 
he oppressed the Israelites. They might have 
meant it for the " good of the great whole" of their 
subjects! 

It is presumed that the reader by this time won- 
ders that any man should have deliberately denied 
the truth of an axiom, so essential to form a correct 
decision respecting the character of any cause, au- 
thor, or agent : But he will be more surprised to 
hear that it has been denied for the purpose of vin- 
dicating the doctrines of the reformation ! How 
came these bold champions to enter their solemn 
protest against the Pope and his adherents ? Did 
not these men of God, infer the wickedness of the 
men, and of their systems of operation, by the per- 
nicious effects which were produced in the Romish 
church ? While they beheld almost every species 
of wickedness sanctioned by public example, and 
licensed for a stipulated price, by which indulgen- 
cies to commit sin were purchased, and crimes of 
the darkest hue sanctified by clerical authority, the 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 119 

people oppressed and robbed by ecclesiastical ty- 
ranny and civil despotism ; — I say, while the im- 
mortalized Luther and others beheld these abom- 
inations, pouring forth like a mighty torrent, did 
they not justly infer that the fountain whence these 
impure streams issued, was dreadfully corrupted ? 
Had they, like some of their pretended followers, 
denied the truth of our axiom, they never would 
have presumed on the impurity and wickedness of 
the hierarchy of Rome, because they saw so much 
ungodliness eftected by it. Men of renown ! How 
unlike some of their disciples. Acting upon the 
principle for which we now contend, they conclud- 
ed that the assumed head of the church, was crimi- 
nally corrupt ; and hence with a bold, but Chris- 
tian intrepidity, they disclaimed his authority, ab- 
jured his jurisdiction, and renounced his pretended 
infallibility ; justly concluding that he who was the 
author of so many errors, could not himself be in- 
fallibly right. And did they not reason correctly? 
No, if the truth of our maxim be denied : but if 
admitted, they reasoned conclusively, and acted 
consistently. Protesting against both the fountain 
and streams of impurity, which they saw overflow- 
ing the moral world, and opening a way to the 
pure fountain of eternal truth and righteousness, 
they directed their followers to its refi-eshing wa- 
ters, that they might drink of its exhilarating 
streams and live forever. So far as they followed 
Christ, may we be stimulated to emulate their ex- 
ample, and enter our protest against every princi- 
-ple which has an unrighteous tendency, as well as 
every practice inconsistent with the precepts of 
the gospel. 

One of the strongest objections that I know to 
the present doctrine, is. If an effect must partake 
of the likeness of its cause, and if all things were 
created good, how came moral evil in existence? U 



120 ON UNIVERSAL DIVIKE 

man were holy, how could he have committed sin ? 
I have placed this objection in the strongest point 
of light ; and yet, I do not apprehend it is insupe- 
rable. When it is said, a good cause cannot pro- 
duce a bad effect, the proposition is predicated of 
the immutable ndXwYQoi\h.Q cause. And, as God is 
immutably wise, just, good and holy, and therefore 
cannot, without becoming imperfect, divest himself 
of any of these essential properties of his nature, 
He cannot be the Author, or effectuating cause of 
any foolish, unjust, bad or unholy effect. But 
when this maxim is applied to mutable beings, such 
as angels or men, it must be limited to the time that 
such beings remain wise and good, and while they 
continue to use their active powers in obedience 
to the divine will : while they thus remain, all their 
actions must be wise and good. However difficult 
it may be to explain how such beings changed in the 
object of their choice ; or, in other words, whatever 
mysteries there may be on the subject of the origin 
of evil, it is manifest that a fallible being is liable 
to make an unwise choice, because of the imper^- 
fection of his judgment ; and a mutable being is 
liable to change from good to bad because of the 
mutability of his nature : and, as to the origin of 
evil, so far as man is accountable, it seems most 
proper to refer it to the volition of his mind, in 
listening to the voice of the deceitful serpent. 

Both scripture and reason declare, that man was 
created holy and good ; but both of these witnesses 
testify that he is now unholy and bad. Here then 
are two facts supported by the most ample testimo^ 
ny. Man then has suffered a change by some 
means. How that change was effected, reason 
alone cannot give us satisfactory information. Rev- 
elation, however, solves the difficulty, by conducting 
our minds to the cause of this mighty change. That 
declares, that man, yielding te the subtle insinua- 



AGENCY AND EFFICIENCY. 121 

tions of the tempter, transgressed the law of his Ma- 
ker, thereby excluding himself from the paradise of 
God, and effacing the image of righteousness and 
true' holiness in which he was created, and entailed 
a moral disease upon himself and his unfortunate 
posterity. But there Avas an extraneous cause ac- 
companying this act. There was a subtle serpent, 
whose beguiling speech operated as an external 
motive upon the woman ; and her solicitation to 
her husband to participate with her in eating the 
fruit zvhich was pleasant to the eyes, and greatly 
to be desired to make one wise, operated as a double 
incentive upon Adam's mind ; and he, in an evil 
hour, willed a compliance with the temptations. — 
Here we have a proof of his fallible and mutable 
nature. And so also how the wisest and best of 
men, although while they continue wise and good, 
and while they use their active powers as they 
ought, the effects which they produce must bear dis- 
tinctive marks of wisdom and goodness, yet, being 
fallible they may err, and being mutable they may, 
by a wrong use of their active powers, change from 
good to bad. The most rational account that can be 
given of this matter, I believe is, that man in the 
beginning possessed, and still possesses, an inher 
ent power, under the persuasive influence of mo- 
tives, and the resistible control of God's moral 
governmcni, of beginning motion, and of selecting 
at pleasure, among a variety of objects, which he 
will. However difficult it may be to ascertain or 
discriminate the properties of the human soul, noth- 
ing can be more certain, I think, than that it is 
something which thinks, wills, and acts freely * and 
that this thinking, acting, and voluntary something, 
is a proper subject of moral government, free and 
responsible for its operations : and though made 
upright at first, was capable, under those restraints 
and incentives with which the Creator surrounaed 



122 ON UNIVERSAL DIVINEj &C. 

it, by its own energies, of either continuing up- 
right, or of prostrating itself by making a wrong 
choice. The latter, it seems, was preferred. And 
in this instance both its fallible and changeable na- 
ture were evinced. 

Whether these observations will satisfy the in- 
quisitive or not, the axiom for which we contend is 
amply supported, not only by rational argument, 
but also by the testimony of sacred Scripture ; and 
this is another proof of the delightful harmony of 
divine testimony with the deductions of enlightened 
reason. 'A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit.' 
Mat. vii. 18. 'Doth a fountain send forth at the 
same place^ sweet water and bitter ?' No ; ' for no 
fountain cd^nboth yield salt water and fresh.' James 
iii. 11, 12. The obvious conclusion is, that a sys- 
tem which induces its supporters to annihilate for 
its defence, an axiom of such evident utility, so 
strongly supported by scripture and reason, must 
be founded in error. Renounce the system, and you 
may safely follow the current of truth, and say, 
That God, who is immutably good, wise and holy^ 
cannot be the " effectuating cause of moral eviL^^ 



123 

CHAPTER II. 

On Human Depravity, 

On entering upon this subject, circumstances 
have rendered it necessary to rectify some mis« 
takes. 

When I published my letters to Mr. Williston, I 
observed in the second letter, which treated the 
subject now under consideration, that. I thought he 
had misstated the question on that subject, in his 
sermon ; and I am under the same conviction still. 
That he did, I think I shall be able to prove to the 
satisfaction of all impartial readers. 

In his sermon, he said, p. 29. " It was the second 
question in the debate, Whether men, in their natu- 
ral state, previous to regeneration, are totally sin- 
ful or depraved." ' This,' said I in re^^ly, p. 67, 
* I believe is erroneous. If I am not greatly mis- 
taken, the question stood thus — Is man totally de- 
praved vntil he is justified V Mr. W. in his vindi- 
cation, avers in positive terms, that I was under a 
mistake, and that he was right : and to prove his 
assertion, he tells us, p. 5b. that he has the manu- 
script minutes of the public debate before him ; 
and from them he says it appears, that the ques- 
tion was, Are all men " totally depraved" — " xintli 
they were regenerated ?" Now, whether / was 
mistaken or not, it is manifest that he icas, either in 
his sermon, or his vindication ; for, the two state- 
ments arc more at variance, than are my question 
and his last statement. The reader is requested 
to pay particular attention to the wording of the 
question in the sermon, and to compare it with the 
one in the vindication. 



124 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 



In the sermon it stands \In the vindication it stands 

thus : 
Whether men " are to- 
tally depraved" until 

they were regenerated." 



thus : 
" Whether men, in their 
natural state, previous to 
regeneration, are totally 
depraved, or sinful." 

When 1 objected to his statement of the question, 
it was not to the word regenerated ^ for 1 thought 
that this term was used in the same sense as justi- 
fied ^ and, that my readers might not misapprehend 
me, I apprized them, p. 71, that I used those terms 
synonymously : but the objection I had, and still 
have, to Mr. W's statement is, because he inserted 
the word previous in his sermon, instead oi until, 
which he has used in his vindication ; and also, be- 
cause in his sermon he inserted the words, natural 
state^ which were not in the question, accordiog to 
his own acknowledgment in his vindication. It 
will now be perceived, I apprehend, by every at- 
tentive reader, that if the vindicator be right, then 
the sermonizer was wrong; for they are totally at 
variance. 

That all our readers may be fully apprized of the 
importance of the above distinction in this part of 
our controv-ersy, it is necessary to remark, that the 
reason why 1 objected to the words, natural state, 
2Lnd previotis, is, because we do hold that mankind 
in a totally natural state, are totally depraved ; and 
that previous to regeneration they are totally sinful; 
but we deny that they remain so, U7itil regenerated 
or justified. The only difference between us there- 
fore, as I then conceived was, Do sinners remain 
totally depraved until regenerated or justified ; for 
I understood and used these terms as synonymous ; 
and, to prevent mistake, I informed Mr. W. that I 
confounded them. Not that I considered the words 
regeiveration and justification as having, according 
to their radical import, the same signification : but 
I concluded he used them in the same sense, for the 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 125 

following reasons. 1. In his sermon on regenera- 
tion, he contended that a regenerated man was in 
the favour of God, possessing. disinterested benev- 
olence, being born of God, and having holiness 
stamped on his heart. 2. He argued that ail re- 
generated men had passed the " dividing line" be- 
tween life and death — all regenerated sinners were, 
according to him, on " the side of life ;'* and, ac- 
cording to his doctrine of infallible perseverance, 
they were sure of heaven. 3. Now 1 could not 
perceive how a saint, that is, a hnli/ one^ one born 
of God, and in the way of infallible perseverance, 
could be, at the same time, in a state of condemna- 
tion, or not in a state of justification. 4. AlthoL';:{h, 
therefore, there may be a perceivable distinction 
between regeneration and justification, I considered 
them so intimately connected, that a truly regene- 
rated man, must be in a state of justification, for 
the reasons above mentioned. These considera- 
tions led me to conclude that Mr. W. believed all 
regenerated men were justified; and therefore of 
set purpose, 1 used those terms synonymously to 
prevent confusion. 

If Mr. W. had attended to these things, he might 
have saved himself ail that labour in p. 56, to prove 
that •! confounded these terms ; and likewise it 
would have superseded the necessity of his insinu- 
ation in p. 58, that I laboured to shift the terms for 
the purpose of avoiding the contested question. 
For my candour on this subject, I shall submit to the 
decision of my readers who impartially weigh what 
is said. My simple avowal of it, would be, per- 
haps, insufficient to produce conviction, unless it 
were attended with extraneous testimony. And, 
that the reader may have the whole subject before 
him, it is expedient to remark, that, when I had 
read Mr. Wh vindication on this point, I address- 
ed a letter to him, pledging myseli^ that, if I had 

1. 2 



126 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

misstated the question, my acknowledgment, when 
convicted, should be as public as my error had 
been : I therefore requested him to send me an at- 
tested copy of the question, from the manuscript mi- 
nutes of the debate, informing him that 1 wanted 
the question, and not the arguments. He had the 
politeness to answer my letter ; but informed me 
that the question was not in the minutes ; and there- 
fore he sent me some of the arguments^ and from 
these it does appear, that in the dispute between 
Mr. Benedict and myself, that the word regeneration 
•was principally used ; and therefore, either the 
terms were confounded in the debate, or I was un- 
der a mistake in inserting the word justified. I 
have only further to say, that I also had a copy of 
the minutes of the debate, (but which is now lost) 
which was attested by the same persons ; and I 
distinctly remember of examining them some time 
after the debate ; and it amounts to a satisfactory 
certainty to my own mind, that the word justified^ 
and not regenerated wSiS in the question. It is pos- 
sible, however, that 1 am under a mistake; on 
which account I said in my letter to Mr. W. ' If I 
am not greatly mistaken,' &c. Now he acknowl- 
edges in his vindication, that the question was, is 
man " totally depraved" — " ur>til regenerat-ed ?" 
and therefore it was not as he had stated in his 
sermon, " in a natural state, previous to regenera- 
tion." All the mistake then that 1 made, if I made 
any, was, in substituting the word justified for 
regenerated ', and, in the sense I used the term, it 
did not effect the controversy at all. The public 
raust now judge how far 1 was from the truth ; and 
they must also determine which of Mr. W's state- 
ments is correct, that in the sermon, or that in the 
vindication ; for they are no more alike than Me- 
thodism and Hopkinsianism : because, it is certain 
a man may be totally depraved pr€i?iQW5 to regene- 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 127 

ration, and yet not remain so witil regenerated. 
He may be favoured with spiritual light to convict 
him of sin, have a godly sorrow for sin, previous 
to regeneration — to all which a totally depraved 
sinner is an entire stranger; and therefore a sin- 
ner may not be totally depraved until regenerated, 
if we suppose him at the same time justified. In- 
deed, this is the only point of dissonance between 
us on this subject ; for we never believed that men, 
when considered totally destitute of all the benefits 
of Redemption, or merely in a " natural state," 
were not totally depraved. 

But Mr. W. p. 57, has made a distinction be- 
tween regeneration and justification, thus ; " It is 
the penitent believing sinner whom God justifies ; 
but he regenerates the impenitent unbelieving sin- 
ner." From this it follows that an impenitent un- 
believing sinner is made holy, is in the way to life^ 
and so secure that he will infallibly be saved with 
life everlasting, before he is justified. Who would 
have believed, unless they had been informed in 
so many words, that any man supposed that aniw- 
penitent unbelieving sinner is a saint ? And who 
would have imagined that a saint, having the 
" image of God impressed upon his heart," is 
nevertheless in a state of condemnation, and yet 
impenitent 2ind unbelieving /* It was from the mani- 
fest absurdity of holding to such strange notions, 
that I was induced to believe that Mr. W. suppo- 
sed a regenerated man is justified. 

Understanding the term justification as wt define 
it, as implying a pardon of actual sin, and a resto- 
ration to the favour of God through faith in Christ, 
Mr. W. agrees with us that sinners are not totally 
depraved im/i/ justified ; and therefore I conclude 
that all my arguments in the letter on that subject, 
in support of that negative proposition, stand good. 
And, as this is the point, and the only point we 



128 ON huma;:? depravity. 

contend for on ihis subject, I see no necessity of 
continuing this part of our controversy any further. 
That this important doctrine is fully conceded by 
Mr. W. we have the most ample assurance from 
his own words in p. 57, where he says, " For we 
believe it as fully as he can" — " that men do not 
remain totally depraved until justified." And he 
certainly knows that this is the only point 1 advo- 
cated in my letter to him. This question therefore 
may be considered at rest between us. And I re- 
joice that an opportunity presents itself to declare 
our cordial assent to 07ie point of Christian doc- 
trine. Let the reader remember, and that he may, 
I repeat it, we agree that mankind are not totally 
depraved until they are justified. 

Let us now examine Mr. W.'s definition of re- 
generation. He says that regeneration is a radical 
change of the heart from sin to holiness — that God 
does not pardon a sinner, that is, justify him, until 
he has made him a saint. To support this defi- 
nition of regeneration, he quotes to Eph. ii. 1.- — 
' You hath he quickened, who Vv'ere dead.' &c. and 
verse 4. ' even when we were dead,' <fec. ' God 
quickened, or renewed, or regenerated, these sin- 
ners when they were dead in sin.'* From these 
and similar sentences in his book, it appears he 
supposes that when the scriptures speak of quick- 
ening^ enlightening^ convincing. Sac. they .mean 
regeneration. If this be so, then the first visit- 
ation of divine grace to the heart, must be con- 
sidered as efiecting a radical change, or pro- 
ducing regeneration: and if it be proper to con- 
sider the first visitation of divine grace to the 
heart regeneration, then we agree, with our oppo- 
nent, that sinners are totally depraved uptil regene- 

'^ These quotations are taken from bis manuscript letter be- 
fore mentioned. 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 129 

rated ; for, as before observed, we consider every 
man who is totally graceless, entirely sinful. But 
we wish it to be distinctly understood, that we do 
not think, that when the sacred writers speak of 
the iiew'birthj of being washed in the laver of regeri' 
eration, and of being born of God so as not to com- 
mit sin, that they mean the same as being enlight- 
ened, convicted, &:c. and it is therefore that we 
conclude that a man is enlightened, or convicted, 
or quickened, before he is regenerated. 

VVe grant there may be, and it is probable there 
ought to be, a distinction made between regenera- 
tion and jusiification ; but we consider them so near- 
ly connected in respect to time^ that it is not abso- 
lutely necessary in theological works to keep up a 
distinction. The reason why we consider them so 
nearly connected is, that it seems incredible that a 
sinner should have his heart changed by the spirit 
o{ holiness, be born again from above, and yet be 
in a state of condrmnaiion. We consider the 
scriptures to mean by justification, the acquitting a 
penitent believing sinner from the guilt of actual 
sin ; so that, from being an * alien from the com- 
monwealth of Israel,' he has become a 'fellows- 
citizen of the honshold of faith,' taken into the 
favour of God, and considered in the relation of a 
child of God, and an heir of Jesus Christ ; and we 
believe that the moment a sinner is thus justified 
freely by grace, he is also boi-n of the Spirit, or 
regenerated. This is another reason why I con- 
foutjded the terms in my letter to Mr. W. 

Thus have I, with all the candour and impartial- 
ity of which I am master, endeavoured to exhibit a 
true statement of this part of our controversy. If 
I have failed, it has been for want of competent 
powers, or for want of clearer light. And from 
this statement it appears to me, that the principal 
difference between us and Mr. W. is, that we do 



150 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

not use the word regeneration in the same sense. 
From the most deliberate view 1 have been able to 
take of this subject, I am induced to believe, that 
what we generally call conviction for sin, which is 
produced by the enlightening influence of the word 
and Spirit of God upon the sinner's heart, the 
Hopkinsians call regeneration :* and if this discre~ 

* That the reader may not suppose the suggested difficulty of 
UDdorstanding- precisely what Mr. W. means by regeceration, 
is designed to perplex the subject, I will here transcribe a lit- 
tle of what he has written upon this subject. In p. 57, after 
having- asserted that God " regenerates the impenitent and wn- 
hel.cving sxnner^''^ he observes, ''and this regenerating power 
of God is the ver}' thing which makes him become a penitent, 
and a believer." Accordiog to this statement a sinner is re- 
g-eAerated hbfore\\\2X penitence wYnch results from a conviction 
fordp.; •a.ml \\iU conviction for sin, of course is not antecedent 
but subsequeni to regeneration ; and hence regeneration must 
be the ^first work of the Holy Spirit upon this sinner's heart. 
And this is the way I understood him in his sermon, and the 
way in which I have generally understood the Hopkinsians 
upon this subject. But in p. 61. he seems to me, and I cer- 
tainly do not wieh to misapprehend him, to advance a directly 
opposite sentiment. He says, '* We are far from calling the 
first serious impressions, of which sinners are the subjects, by 
the name of regeneration. IVo, we believe that sinners may 
not only be seriously impressed, but even deeply weighed down 
wi(h conviction," he. and still possess " that carnal mind 
which is enmity against God, and would dethrone him, if it 
was armed with sufficient power." When I read an author, 1 
think myself bound to understand him according to the usual 
import of words, unless he define his sense of them to be differ- 
ent : and I believe all theological writers understand by pejii- 
tence a godly sorrow for sin, which is produced by being con- 
victed that we are sinners. Now in the first quoted passsge, 
Mr. W. says, that this penitence is subsequent to regeneration ; 
but in the latter, he says that sinners are so deeply impressed 
and weighed down witk conviction^ " as to spend all their time 
in reading the Bible, or in the closet, and in religious meet- 
ings," antecedent to regeneration. This latter opinion is ours ; 
(with the exception of that dreadful desire to dethrone God) 
but he thiuks that our sentiments upon total depravity are so 
heterodox, as to destroy the scriptural doctrine of human de- 
pravity ! We therefore conclude, and not merely from this 
circumstance only, but from his general mode of argumenta- 
tion, that the former sentiment is his settled opinion, namely, 
that penitence zxiA faith follow regeneration. We furthermore 
think, that our difficulty in comprehending his meaning on this 
subject, claims some allowance from the obscure, and contra^ 
dictory manaeria which he has expressed it. 



ON HUMAN DEPHAVITT* 131 

jjance were merely verbal it would be unworthy of 
contention. But the great danger of supposing 
that the first operation of divine grace upon the 
heart is regeneration, is, that it serves to delude 
sinners into a belief that they are saints when they 
are not. Believing themselves saints, merely be- 
cause they have been made sensible of the sinful- 
ness of their hearts, and have had some sorrow for 
sin, and then adopting that other part of Hopkinsi- 
anism, the infallible perseverance of all such 
saints, the error must have a most fatal tendency. 
We all know how prone mankind are to flatter 
themselves with a false hope ; to conclude that 
their spiritual state is good ; and to persuade them- 
selves that their final felicity is secured; and hence, 
(as Mr. Flavcl somewhere observes, ' If the prin- 
ciple will yield it, think not but that corrupt nature 
will catch at it,') the imminent danger to which 
sinners are exposed who fancy themselves eternal- 
ly secured in the immutable covenant of Redemp- 
tion, merely because they have had a good desire, 
or some heart-rendings on account of their native 
vileness. It is on this account chiefly that we ob- 
ject to the Hopkinsian definition of regeneration, 
or the new-birth. U the holy scriptures teach, and 
we believe they do, that sinners are enlightened to 
see their sinfulness, have a godly sorrow produced, 
and have a hatred to sin excited in their hearts, 
previous to regeneration, then it must be extremely 
hazardous to teach them to believe that these are 
certain indications of their having been regenerat- 
ed. The scriptures can teach no dangerous doc- 
trine. They are directly calculated to lead man- 
kind into the safest and surest way. 

If total depravity be compatible \^i(h being un- 
der the invaluable privileges of Ur." grand cove/iant 
of Redemption, the benefits or which extend to all 
men, so that a portion of grac»j is given to all in 



132 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

the day of their probation, to enable them to repent 
and believe in Christ and lead a holy life, with the 
warnings of God's word and providence, the com- 
manding motives of the gospel, and the invisible 
operation of the Holy Spirit — I say, if total de- 
pravity be compatible with all these distinguished 
favours, be it so — then will we believe that all men 
are totally depraved until regenerated. But we 
think that a man ought not to be considered totally 
depraved, totally vitiated by sin, and totally depriv- 
ed of spiritual favours, while he enjoys so many un- 
merited favours from God, and while he is so far en- 
lightened and influenced by gospel blessings. How 
can a man be totally dark, while blessed with so 
much light ? How be totally vitiated by sin, while he 
has many good desires produced in his heart by the 
Holy Spirit, forms many good resolutions, avoids 
many evils, and might hearken to many good coun- 
sels ? According to our perceptions of the new- 
birth, (and we believe ourjperceptions scriptura-l,) a 
sinner has all these merciful visitations before he is 
regenerated ; and hence we conclude he is not to- 
tally deprived, nor totally depraved until he is re- 
generatedror justified. 

This was the point principally insisted upon in 
my letter to Mr. W. and I think I have given suf- 
ficient scripture authority for its defence, to only 
one of which has he replied : I therefore take for 
granted that the doctrine stands as an indisputable 
truth. 

That this subject may be clearly understood, it 
is expedient to explain, as far as we are able, how, 
or in what sense, sinners are depraved. We do 
not suppose, that cither Adam himself, nor any of 
his posterity, were deprived of any powers of the 
soul, nor that the soul itself was converted into sin, 
in consequence of original transgression. The fa- 
culties of the soul, (if it be proper to use that ap- 



ON HDMAN DEPRAVITY. 133 

pelative in reference to a simple uncomponnded 
being) were neither destroyed, nor changed into 
sin ; but they were deprived of much of their ori- 
ginal energy, and directed to improper objects. 
The soul has become, if we may so speak, overlaid 
with sin ; so that while under its dominion, unas- 
sisted by divine grace, the sout cannot exert itself 
in any thing that is evangelically good ; nor is it 
fit, while in this polluted state, for the enjoyment 
of God ; this moral pollutien must be washed away ; 
and this is done in the laver of regeneration. To 
illustrate this idea, we will suppose a man to have 
precipitated himself from some eminence, by which 
the functions of his body are so enervated that he 
is unable to arise and walk ; and in his fall his 
garments are so torn that he is unfit for the society 
of his friends until he obtains a change of raiment." 
In this melancholy condition we suppose he must 
continue forever, unless some benevolent friend do 
that for him which he cannot do for himself. The 
moment however, that this friend raises him from his 
helpless situation, induces a circulation of the fluids 
by the application of suitable remedies, so that the 
unfortunate man is able to feel and move, some of 
the sad effects of his sudden fall are removed : and 
the moment he walks, he gives evidence that he is 
not now totally helpless ; although he is not yet re- 
stored to perfect health, nor is he Kt to appear among 
his friends until he exchanges his tattered garments 
for a new suit. But such, we will suppose, is his 
poverty that he is entirely dependent uj)on the lib- 
erality of his friend for suitable clothing to intro- 
duce him to society. 

Here is a representation of fallen Adam, and of all 
his posterity as they were then in his loins. And not- 
withstanding Jesus Christ did raise Adam from his 
totally helpless condition, yet, as this was an act of 
divine grace^ and as his posterity have been propa« 



134' ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY, 



• 



gated by natural generation, it is scriptural and 
reasonable to conclude that they partake of the fal- 
len depraved nature of their progenitors ; and in 
this depraved state we suppose all are born into 
the world. Behold, then, man as having fallen by 
transgression, by which the energies of his mind 
are weakened, and his soul entirely defiled by sin. 
In this helpless and polluted condition, he must 
have remained forever, were it not for the benevo- 
lent interposition of Jesi^s Christ. In consequence 
of his amazing condescension, in rescuing man 
from the thraldom of the fall, all his unfortunate 
posterity are more or less favoured with the merci- 
ful visitations of grace previous to regeneration, 
by which the energies of their souls are strengthen- 
ed, and they are capacitated to repent and believe 
in their benevolent Redeemer. But that they may 
be restored to perfect spiritual health, so as to walk 
in the way of God's conimandments, and be fit for 
the society of the saints, they must have the heal- 
ing balm of Jesus' blood applied to their hearts, 
have their filthy garments of iniquity taken off, and 
be clothed with the garments of salvation — this is 
done by justification and sanctification. Now, I con- 
ceive, the moment they are favoured with the small- 
est degree of grace, with the slightest touches of 
the Holy Spirit, to remove any of the darkness oc- 
casioned by original transgression, to communicate 
any degree of spiritual strength, some of the conse- 
quences of original depravity are removed ; and 
therefore it is contended that they are not totally 
depraved until born of the Spirit. 

Moreover, we do not suppose, that depravity or 
sinfulness, as such, is ever any otherwise than tO' 
iai. It suffers no change, no increase, nor dimin- 
ution in its character. When a sinner is regene- 
rated and justified, his depravity is not changed, 
nor subjugated. ' The carnal mind is not subject- 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 135 

to the law of God, neither indeed can ie.' It was 
never designed to be subjugated to the kingdom of 
Christ. It must be totally destroyed. But in the 
destruction of carnality, the soul, which was con- 
taminated with sin, is washed, and saved. The 
sinner, who, while under its influence and domin- 
ion, was depraved, is, in regeneration and justifica- 
tion, delivered from that depravity, and is brought 
under the dominion and influence of grace. But 
though depravity, as such, (if we can affix any de- 
terminate ideas to that term besides sinful propen- 
sities) is always total, possessing nothing good, yet 
the sinner himself is not always totally depraved : 
his heart is changed, and his soul washed from that 
moral pollution consequent upon original and actu- 
al sin. His heart, as well as his state, according 
to our view of the subject, is aft'ectcd for the better, 
in consequence of the unconditional benefits of Re- 
demption; though his depravity, as such, is not 
affected, made no better, neither by the uncon- 
ditional benefits of Redemption, nor by any of its 
conditional benefits. The least weight of alloy, is 
as much alloy, as if there were an hundred weight. 
This depravity, or sinfulness, was not the object of 
the divine philanthropy; but the unhappy sinner 
who was under ils influence, was an object of divine 
compassion. That depravity is not converted in- 
to holiness ; but the heart of the sinner is convert- 
ed by the Spirit of holiness. Whatever of sinful- 
ness we have, must, before we are fitted for the 
kingdom of heaven, be destroyed, and the soul 
which was infected with it, must be washed and 
made lihite in the blood of the Lamb. I know not 
that I can make this subject any plainer. 

Mr. W. p. 63 — 65, complains that I have not met 
one of his arguments. I believe he is under a 
great mistake. The reader, however, who con- 
sults our works, must judge for himself. But, he 



136 ON HUMAN DEPRAVIIT. 

also observes, that I have not noticed those passages 
of scripture he quoted, by shewing, either that they 
were mis-quoted or mis-interpreted." This is true. 
But, as a candid disputant, he ought either to have 
noticed the reason 1 had assigned, and shewn it was 
insufficient to have excused me, or have said noth- 
ing about it. My reason for not examining his 
scripture quotations, was expressed in p. 86, thus : 
' Indeed, the principal part of your sermon on total 
depravity, is entirely foreign to the point. For we 
know that mankind are wicked enough, and that 
their depravity is sufficiently manifest in their de- 
termined opposition to God.' And in p. 84. ' It 
is unnecessary to make any remarks upon the texts 
of scripture you have quoted to prove that man- 
kind are depraved previous to regeneration, be- 
cause this is a truth we never denied.' — And I am 
of the same sentiment now. His object in his ser- 
mon was, to prove that mankind, while '' in a state 
of n^xiuve, previous to regeneration," are totally de- 
praved ; and this doctrine we neve?' denied, as I 
shall prove presently. Was not his sermon there- 
fore as totally foreign to the point, as if he had un- 
dertaken to prove what he now acknowledges a 
truth, namely, That they are not totally depraved 
until justified : A truth this, for which we always 
contended. 

But the object of Mr. W. is sufficiently obvious, 
both in his sermon, and in his vindication. He 
strives to impress the public with a belief that we 
are Pelagians, that we deny the natural and origin- 
al depravity of the human race. Let not the read- 
er be alarmed at this heavy accusation against our 
antagonist — The proof is at hand — and if it convict 
him of calumny, blame not the author. Mr. W. 
has given his book to the public ; and it is from 
that book that I shall adduce my proof. His un- 
founded accusation is the more inexcusable, as h? 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 137 

had our book of discipline and doctrine, and my 
letters before him, when he wrote ; and it is from 
these sources alone that I shall derive my evidence 
to support my charge against him. 

If the reader will turn to p. 188 of Mr. W.'s 
book, he will find in a note the followi:g words ; 
*' The doctrines which are now called Arminian, 
and which are advocated by the Meiho lists, ap- 
pear to be substantially the same with those which 
were advanced by Pelagius in the beginning of the 
fifth century. He appeared to deny the original 
depravity of infants, and the total depravity of the 
unregenerale. He held to the independence and 
self-detennining power of the will, and of course, 
denied the necessity of divir^e grace, directly to in- 
cline the will to that which is good, of course, ex- 
cluded predestination, except what is founded in 
the foreknowledge of man^s faith and obedience. — 
He also held to a sinless perfection in this life. 
(See Milner's Church Hist. Vol. 2.) These senti- 
ments were then considered by Augustine, and the 
church in general, not otily as errors, but as very 
fundamental errors, such as greatly tended to de- 
stroy the grace of God in our salvation.''' In re- 
gard to the sentiments of Pelagius, 1 believe we 
have no particular account of them, except what 
we derive from his enemies, his writings being all 
destroyed. And if his enemies, Augustine and 
others, who have transmitted his doctrines to us, 
had no more regard to candour and truth, than Mr. 
W. has evinced in the preceding quotation, it is 
presumed we have but a mutilated account of him, 
and of his doctrines. Were all our writings de- 
stroyed, and posterity should know nothing more 
of us than what they might collect from such un- 
supported assertions as Mr. W. has made, it might 
be concluded that we also denied some of the most 
important doctrines of the gospel. However, from 

M 2 



138 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

the imperfect account we have of Pelagianism, it 
does appear that its author denied the original de- 
pravity of infants, and the total depravity of una- 
wakened sinners, the necessity of divine grace, &c. 
and Mr. W. tells his readers that our doctrines are 
substantially the same. 

It is easy at this distant period, under the cir- 
cumstances before mentioned, to misrepresent Pe- 
lagius ; but how any man should have so little re- 
gard to his own reputation, as to publish such man- 
ifest errors, (might I not justly say such palpable 
falsehoods ?) against a people so well known as the 
Methodists are, by their established articles of faith, 
their approved publications, the number of their 
Preachers and people, scattered all over the conti- 
nent of America, in various parts of Europe, in 
some parts of Asia and Africa, it is difficult to con- 
ceive. In this instance I think our accuser has ex- 
hibited a striking evidence, if not of total depravity, 
yet of prejudice and prepossession. 

But says he, " The Methodists deny the original 
depravity of infants." This accusation is denied : 
and as he has adduced no proof neither from the 
articles of our church, nor from any of our approved 
authors, yt<5/ice does not demand from me to sup- 
port my denial by testimony. However, for the 
satisfaction of my readers, 1 will attempt to do it, 
both from our Discipline and my letters to him. 

Article vii. ' Of Original or Birth SinJ^ 

' Original sin standeth not in the following of 
Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk) but is the 
corruption of the nature, of every man, that naturally 
is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby 
man is very far gone from original righteousness^ 
and of his ovinnatur^ inclined to evil^ and that con- 
tinually.' 



0N HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 139 

The language of this article is such, that it needs 
no comment. It is as pointed against the reputed 
doctrine of Pelagius, as words can make it ; and 
therefore is as ample testimony against Mr. W's 
candour, as any impartial judge can require. Read- 
er, you are, 1 hope, that judge. And lest you 
should suppose that the present author is at va- 
riance with the article of the church of which he is 
a member, you are referred to p. £)3 of his letters to 
Mr. W. There you will find the following words : 
* With Mr. W. we believe, apostate Adam begat a 
son in his own fallen, depraved likeness ; and that 
all who are born into the world possess nothing 
morally good, which they inherited from their an- 
cestors ' Again, p. 94. ' Not that we inherit a 
sanctified nature by natural generation. On the 
contrary, this nature is corrupt and sinful ; and 
when viewed in relation to the Adamic law, deserves 
the wrath of God.' By these quotations the judge 
to whom I have appealed, will, 1 apprehend, acquit 
me of slander, if 1 say Mr. W's accusation is un- 
supported. 

He also asserts, That we deny " the total de- 
pravity of the unregenerate." How far this accu- 
sation is true, the reader must determine after hav- 
ing attentively perused the preceding pages upon 
that subject, and comparing what he there reads 
with p. p. 93, 94 of the " Errors of Hopkinsian- 
ism." 

The Methodists hold " to the independence and 
self- determining power of the will, and of course 
deny the necessity of divine grace, directly to in- 
cline the will to that which is good." We pro- 
nounce this a groundless accusation ; and to prove 
that it is so, we appeal to Article viii. ' Of free 
WILL.' ' The condition of man after the fall of 
Adam is such, that he cannot turn and prepare him- 
Eelf by his own natural strength and works of faith 



140 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

and calling upon God : Wherefore we have no 
power to do good works, pleasant and acceptable 
to God, without the grace ofGodhy Christ preventr 
ing us, that we may have a good will, and working 
with us when we have that good willJ^ Can any 
words more pointedly contradict the accusation of 
our opponent ? And that my own sentiments were 
in perfect harmony with the doctrine of that arti- 
cle, may be seen by the following quotation from 
my letters, p. 244. * The scripture doctrine of 
perseverance which we advocate, asserts, that the 
grace of repentance, \.\\q power to believe, and the 
ability to love and obey, are all gratuitously be- 
stowed upon man ; so that, were they withheld, no 
one could make his calling and election sure.' — 
And now reader the evidence is before you. Judge 
righteous judgment. In respect to -what is said 
about " predestination" and " sinless perfection 
in this life," it will be noticed in another place. 

Perhaps some may say, I ought to use softer 
language, and not bluntly accuse Mr. W. with er- 
roneous statements. To such I would reply, Are 
not his accusations without foundation? If they 
are, were I to disguise them, and say I hope they 
are not so, 1 should be guilty of the very crime of 
which I accuse him. Honesty and candour there- 
fore compel me on this occasion to use plain words. 
I would gladly apologize for him, if 1 could. But 
he has deprived me of the privilege. He had, as he 
has informed us, my letters, and our book of doc- 
trines and discipline before him when he wrote. 
To say he was ignorant of our doctrines, when he 
had before his eyes the very books from which I 
have quoted to disprove his charges, is to reproach 
him with a defect, not much less criminal than to 
accuse him of wilful abuse. He may, however, 
apologize for his misrepresentations, several more 
of which will be pointed out, in the way which suits 



ON HUMAN DEFRAVITV. 141 

him best ; confess ignorance, or acknowledge wil- 
ful misrepresentation. While writing against his 
sermons, I thought 1 could honestly excuse his er- 
roneous statements, from his want of information, 
his inattention, or prejudice. Many such misrep- 
resentations 1 charged him with, for w^hich he has 
neither offered an apology, nor acknowledged them 
with frankness. They shall be noted in their pro- 
per place. 

Another instance of his disengenuous method of 
argumentation, occurs in p. 60. In my letter to 
him, 1 observed, ^ The foundation of our obligation 
is the relation in which we stand to God as his 
creatures — but he never can, consistently with his 
nature as a just and benevolent being, require us to 
fulfil that obligation without affording all proper 
assistance. Moreover, it is utterly impossible in 
the nature of things, to require us to see without 
light, to hear without sound, or to love without 
grace.' Remarking upon this passajje, he asks, 
*' How much grace is proper assistance to render 
us obliged?" Now did he not knowthaf I had just 
said, that the ybMn(^«/zon of our obligation existed 
antecedent to any redeeming grace ? that it is 
founded in our * relation to God as his creatures ?' 
It is not, therefore, the grace of the gospel which 
lays the foundation of moral obligation, or which 
" renders us obliged." It is believed that Mr. W. 
misapprehended me in that paragraph, as his obser- 
vations have no bearing at all upon my argument. 
1 will endeavour, therefore, to make my meaning 
more perspicuous. I consider then that theybwn- 
dalion of moral obligation is the relation in which 
we stand to God, and to one another as fellow-citi- 
zens, as rulers and subjects, husband and wife, 
parents and children, masters and servants, &c. &c» 
From these various relations originate certain mo- 
ral duties peculiar to each relation, and binding 



142 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

upon all intelligent beings. And so long as this 
relation exists, so long the obligation, both as to 
its foundation, nature and extent, must remain. — 
These various relations, the knowledge of them, 
the various duties resulting from them, and the 
means of fulfilling them, all flow from the good 
pleasure of God, which is also guided and direct- 
ed by the rectitude of His own infinite mind. — 
This good pleasure of God has been manifested in 
the law and the gospel, in which he has been pleas- 
ed to manifest his infinite good will, in revealing 
to man the knowledge of his relation to his Crea- 
tor, to discriminate the various duties which result 
from man's relative situation ; and also, through 
the mediation of Jesus Christ, to furnish man with 
the most ample means to fulfil his obligation to 
God, and to his fellow creature. 

The foundation of moral obligation, the know- 
ledge of it, and the means and manner o^ fulfilling 
it, are totally distinct things. The foundation is 
the mutual relation subsisting among moral beings. 
We come to the knowledge of this relation, and the 
various duties resulting from it, by the revelation 
of God's will. We are furnished with ability and 
the means of fulfilling it, by the grace of God in 
Christ Jesus. To illustrate this idea : The obli- 
gation of a child to obey its parents originates from 
the relation subsisting between parents and chil- 
dren. Th\% h lis foundation. The various duties 
originating from this foundation are made known by 
the revelation of God's will, and the means of dis- 
charging them are furnished by the gospel of Jesus 
Christ. But this relation is mutual ; and therefore 
there are mutual duties originating from it. Were 
a parent to command his son, fourteen years of age, 
to bring him a cup of water, at first view we should 
all say it is the duty of the son to obey, because it 
is the duty of children to obey the command of 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITF. 143 

their parents : But if, upon enquiry, it were ascer- 
tained there was no water to be had, or no vessel to 
convey it, or the child has no feet or hands to help 
himself; if either, or all these impediments weie in 
the way, no one would hesitate to decide, that the 
son is exempted from the obli2;ation to obey in that 
particular case ; although still, it is the duty of that 
son to obey his father, because he is his son ; and 
he is only exempted in that particular case, on the 
si/pposition that a wise and benevolent father would 
not insist upon obedience under such circumstan- 
ces : if he should, he would evince to the world, 
that he was destitute of the qualifications of a pa- 
ternal ruler, and should be deprived of his author- 

Apply this simile to the subject under considera- 
tion. Sinners, it is said, are totally depraved — 
that is, in consequence of Adam's sin, they are to- 
tally unable to love God, as it is their duty to do : 
yet, say the Hopkinsians, God has a right to de- 
mand their love, although they have no moral pow- 
er, and are not furnished with any means to obey. 
On the contrary, we say, that God, who is infinitely 
wise and good^ will not, because he is possessed of 
those perfections, require them to obey, without 
affording them all proper assistance. Take a sin- 
gle instance. Suppose there is one reprobate, for 
whom Christ died, but had no intention of saving 
him, and to whom no gracious ability to repent or 
believe in Christ was ever given. And his inahility 
with all its effects, has been induced by the effect- 
ive decree of God, or by a divine constitution is 
made to result from the sin of Adam, in which this 
reprobate had no active nor responsible agency ; 
can Q\{\\^v justice or goodness require the condemn- 
ation of this reprobate for ^n inability which is per- 
fectly pleasing to God, and which he designed 
should forever prevent this reprobate from loving 



144 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

him ? I think not. He has neither a natural, 
moral, nor gracious ability ; and he has not brought 
this inability upon himself, by his own actual sin ; 
of course the utter impossibility of obeying exempts 
him in that particular instance.* But in this de- 
plorable state the Hopkinsians represent all the 
reprobates. God, according to them, originally 
decreed that they should be cursed with this ina- 
bility, and he absolutely refuses to afford them aiiy 
kind of assistance ; and yet, say they, he cofh- 
mands them all to repent, regenerate themselves, 
believe in Christ, and become holy by their own 
natural strength. Although they can be under no 
obligation under such impossible circumstances to 
obey, yet we believe all men are under obligation 
to love and obey God, from the relation in which 
they stand to Him as his creatures ; and they are 
all able to obey him because all men are impow^ 
ered through the atoning merits of Christ so to do : 
and hence, if they do not, the unhappy consequence 
resulting from their wilful disobedience, is charge- 
able only on themselves : there was no absolute 
decree, no invincible moral inability, nor no im- 

* The reader is requested to restrict the application of this 
reasoning- to probationers. In respect to those who have once 
had a probationary slate, but have abused it until their day of 
^race is over, their incapacity to obey furnishes no just excuse 
for their disobedience. They once had an ability to have loved 
God, which they might have improved. And they are now 
justly condemned for having abused their active powers, in so 
sinning against God as to outstand the day of their merciful 
visitation. This observation will apply also to devils, as well 
as to all the miserable in hell. It is believed that they are un- 
der as much obligatiop to love God now, as ever they were, 
although they cannot : but the reason why they are justly un- 
der obligation to God, and why they are justly punishable for 
not fulfilling that obligation is, because they did not use their 
high privileges which they once had, as they should and might 
have done. But in respect to Hopkinsian reprobates, their 
case is widely different. According to that theory, these poor 
reprobates were destined for damnation from all eternity. — 
They never had, say the advocates of that system, any moral 
ability to repent, believe in Christ, or to lore God, although 
they had natural ability to do so. 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 145 

pediment from want of an intention in Christ to 
save them, to prevent their salvation. 

But even allowing that a command under such 
circumstances were just, still it is impossible such 
a command should be given by the God of the bi- 
ble, because he is also a being of infinite goodness. 

It is impossible that our God should give such a 
command to probationers under such circumstan- 
ces, because there are no probationers under such 
circumstances. Whatever quantum of depravity 
mankind may have derived from Adam, and how 
much soever it may accumulate during their proba- 
tionary state, it is undeniably true, that Jesus 
Christ has come, that he has made atonement for 
all men, not excepting one ; the true light every 
where shines, among Christians, Jews, and heath- 
ens ; a portion of divine grace is given to all men 
without exception ; and all men are hereby empow- 
ered to see the light of truth, the foundation and 
nature of moral obligation ; and all who live under 
the light of the gospel, may see the necessity and 
nature of evangelical repentance and faith in 
Christ. Now, if Christ tasted death for every man, 
as the scriptures abundantly assert, and if a portion 
of divine grace be given to all men, as they also 
testify, how is it possible for any man to be requir- 
ed to repent without grace, or to believe in Christ 
when he did not die for him. ]( all men, through 
the benefits of Redemption are empowered, during 
their probationary state, to comply with the requi- 
sitions of the gospel, how can they be required to 
comply with them without being so empowered ? It 
is certainly impossible. 

I wish to make this matter plain to every reader, 
not only because it was evaded by Mr. W. but 
also, because it completely destroys the possibility 
oi any man being required to love God without 
grace. And, to illustrate it, we will suppose a man 



146 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

were asked at mid-day, Can you see without eyes, 
and without the light of the sun ? ' No.' But 
why ? If he understand the end the enquirer has 
in view, he would answer, ' Because, I have the per- 
fect use of my eyes, and because the sun now shines, 
and exhibits the objects of sense to my vision.' It 
will be perceived by the attentive reader, that the 
enquiry is not, whether this man could see if the 
light of the sun were withdrawn ; but whether, 
TDhue the sun shines he can see without its light ; 
and every one must acknowledge that it is natural- 
ly and totally impossible. And, it is equally im- 
possible to require a man, under such circumstan- 
ces, to see without eyes, and without the light of 
the sun. 

Just so, while the Sun of Righteousness shines 
upon the moral world, and while the grace of the 
gos-pel visits the hearts of sinners, it is as impossi- 
ble for the sinner to see spiritual objects without 
his enlightening beams, or to believe in Christ 
without grace, as it is for me, while the pen is in my 
hand, to write without it. Now, since the true 
light every where shines, and the grace of God 
•which bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men^ 
God cannot command^ nor require any man totally 
depraved, to repent, and believe in the Lord Jesus 
Christ without affording a gracious power to com- 
ply with the requisition. And this is the point of 
vi^w in which the argument, at which Mr. W. took 
such an evasive look, was presented. 

In p. 54, and 62, he attempts to remove the con- 
tradiction, in which I believed he had involved 
himself by contending that all men are totally de- 
praved until regenerated, and then by conceding 
they are convicted of sin before regeneration ; and 
by saying also, that before regeneration, things are 
" preparing in divine providence for sinners to see 
themselves entirely sinful*" But notwithstanding 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 147 

all he has said, it yet appears to me that the con- 
tradiction really exists. To shew, however, that it 
does not, he observes, p. 62. " Are not sinners, 
even under the gospel stupid as well as depraved .^" 
We answer, yes, they are stupid enough. But is 
not that stupidity onQ of the component parts of de- 
pravity ? 1 think it must belong to depravity, or to 
holiness : and I presume it will not be said that it 
belongs to the latter. Stupidity, then, is essential 
to a totally depraved slate ; and this stupefaction 
continues just so long as the sinner remains totally 
depraved. It follows, therefore, (hat whenever 
they are " aroused out of this stupidity to see on 
what a slippery steep they go." (p. C2.) they are 
not at that time totally depraved : or, when they 
are " awakened by conviction to see themselves," 
some of the sad concomitants of depravity are re- 
moved. Some of the strongest expressions used by 
the Holy Spirit to describe the depravity of man, 
are, ' hlindntss of mind, '^ ' hardness of heart,'* ' thou 
that sleepest ;' and they are represented by the 
prophet Isaiah, as being more stupidly ignorant of 
God, than * the ox that knoweth his owner, and 
the ass his master's crib ;' therefore, when that 
blindness is so far removed that the sinner " sees 
himself," and "admires the exceeding grace of 
God ;" when he is " aroused from his stupidity," 
and his ignorance so far removed, by "awakening 
and conviction," that he knows his danger, he is 
not, at the same time totally depraved, that is total- 
ly stupid, blind, and ignorant : And hence it fol- 
lows that whenever the Hopkinsians concede that 
sinners are thus " aroused," " enlightened" and 
" awakened" previous to regeneration, they virtu- 
ally acknowledge that sinners arc not totally de- 
praved until regenerated. 

1 know, as he remarks, p. 61. that he did not c?e- 
sign to give up total depravity, I believe the doc- 



148 ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 

trine is exceedingly dear to his heart; and that 
he will, as he has said, renounce every sentence he 
has written to. contradict it, if his reputation as an 
author, and the consistency of his system can also 
be maintained ; but these are likewise very dear to 
him ; and therefore he " labours exceedingly," to 
reconcile the different parts of his system, and to 
defend himself from the imputation of inconsisten- 
cy. It is difficult, however, to reconcile contradic- 
tions. The fact is, as I said in my letter to him ; 
* a ray of light providentially intercepted the mist of 
error which his hetereogenous system raised about 
his soul ; and his pen in a happy moment recorded 
it,' to the honour of truth, and to the confusion of 
error. 

Mr. W. likewise, in p. 53, complains of me for 
devoting " nearly two pages more, to expose the 
glaring absurdity of a regenerated totally depraved 
sinner" — and asks, in reply, " Is it any absurdity 
for a regenerated man to tell what his character 
was before regeneration ?" No; but the Hopkinsi- 
ans do not allow that St. Paul in the seventh of 
Romans was relating what he had been^ while an 
unconverted Jew ; but they contend, and Mr. W. 
among the rest, in his sermon on *' sinful imperfec- 
tion," that the Apostle in that chapter was relating 
ivhat he then was, as an apostolic christian. If so, 
and if total depravity is taught in the text taken 
from that chapter, and if it was his present expe- 
rience, then he was a totally depraved saint. 

I know, that in his sermon, on total depravity, 
Mr. W. refers to what St. Paul said, 'I know that 
in me, (that is in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing,' 
to all unrenewed men ; and supposes that the apos- 
tle meant his unrenewed part, so that both the old 
and new man was in him at that time. The same 
sentiment is expressed in the vindication, p. 33. 
''^ If there is now an old and a new man within him? 



ON HUMAN DEPRAVITY. 149 

is there any thing in itself contradictory, that he 
should now tell what the nature or character of the 
old nnan is, though he should not, at the same 
breath, say any thing about the nature or charac- 
ter of the new man." From these words, it is ev- 
ident that Mr. W. supposes the apostle, in the sev- 
enth of Romans, was describing both the old and 
the new man ; — by the Jlesh he meant the old man, 
and by the spirit, the new man : and if the old man 
totally depraved, and the new man totally renewed, 
were in St. Paul at the same time, was he not total- 
ly depraved, and totally holy at the same time ? 
especially, if by the old man he meant to designate 
what the Calvinists call total depravity ? 

We are not accountable for the contradictions of 
our opponents. If at one time, to vindicate one 
part of their system, they so explain the seventh of 
Romans, as to make the apostle refer to what he 
was before a saint ; and then, to support another 
link in their immense chain of decrees, they apply 
what he has there said, to him after he became a 
saint ; must we be blamed for their absurdities, or 
reprimanded for exposing them. Let them em- 
brace a consistent scheme of doctrines, and they 
may avoid the mortification of having their absurd- 
ities detected. 1 repeat it therelbre, that the vin- 
dicator of universal decrees, represents St. Paul, as 
a totally depraved — regenerated — saint — sinner. — 
What will come next? *' Sophomores?" that is 
"wise fools ?" p. 118. 

Neither are we responsible for the number of pa- 
ges occupied in exposing such absurdities. Is the 
mechanic to blame for being a whole season in re- 
building a house which some incendiary was in- 
strumental in consuming in a few minutes ? It re- 
quires but a short time to make bold assertions ; 
but much labour is frequently requisite to refute 
ihem, in order to prevent their pernicious tenden- 

N '^ 



150 ON THE SCRIPTURE 

cy* Let this consideration be an apology for 
spending so much time in this wearisome contro- 
versy. This part of it shall be closed by refer- 
ing the reader to my second letter to Mr. Willis- 
ton, for the scripture authority for our views upon 
human depravity. 



CHAPTER III. 

On the Scripture doctrine of Election, 

In my letter to Mr. Williston on this doctrine, 
I observed, p. 92. ' Your labouring to prove that 
election is not founded upon works foreseen, is cal- 
culated to impress the reader with an idea that we 
believe it is. This sentiment, you know was not 
advocated in the debate/ In reply to this, Mr. 
W. observes in his vindication, "Certainly I did 
suppose — that the Methodists — believed that elec- 
tion was founded on works foreseen ; nor did 1 hear 
any thing offered by Mr. B. in the public debate, 
nor do I see any thing in his letters to lead me to 
alter the opinion I had formed." I am extremely 
sorry to be under the necessity, for the vindication 
of truth, to contradict so many things my oppo- 
nent has asserted. If none were to suffer from 
such erroneous statements but myself, they should 
pass unnoticed : but as truth, and a large body of 
professing Christians are suffering by such repre- 
sentations, duty excites me to correct them. That 
thi« may be done on the present occasion, it is ne- 
cessary to advert to circumstances which took place 
at the public debate, which otherwise would have 
been gladly passed over in silence. 



DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 151 

Mr. W. affirms that he heard nothing in that de- 
bate to induce him to believe we did not hold that 
election was founded on works. Appealing to his 
candour and honesty for the truth of what 1 relate, 
1 will now remind him, that the day preceding the 
debate, Mr. Benedict and myself met, in company 
with several gentlemen, at Mr. Wiiliston's lodgings, 
to fix upon the preliminaries of the debate, and the 
points of doctrine to be discussed. After much 
conversation, which originated from Mr. Benedict's 
unwillingness to investigate the Calvinistic doc- 
trine of foreordination ; and after finally agreeing 
upon the two first points, the doctrine of election 
came next in order. As the points to be discussed 
were proposed in the form of questions, Mr. Bene- 
dict wrote and proposed the following : ' Has God 
elected a certain number of the human family to 
eternal life, without any regard to their" works as 
the foundation of their election ?' To this I ob- 
jected, because it did not embrace his sentiments 
nor mine *, and proposed to insert the word condi' 
tio7i instead of foundation. To this he objected, 
because he said he believed Christ died for all men, 
and that those only would be saved who complied 
with the condition of salvation. 

After much conversation, the Kev. Mr. Fenn of 
Harpersfield proposed this question. What is the 
scripture doctrine of Election ? to which we agreed. 

The next day, when we came to the discussion 
of this doctrine, Mr. Benedict arose, and repeated 
the above question, which had been laid aside. I 
then informed the congregation that that question 
had been under consideration the day before, and 
by mutual consent laid aside ; and, as it did not 
express my sentiments nor his, 1 could have noth- 
ing to say to it ; also, that unless my antagonist 
would abandon that ground, I could have nothing 
more to say on the subject* He then said to me, 



152 ON THE SCRIPTURE 

* Write one yourself/ I then wrote and read, * I 
believe Christ died for all men, and that whosoever 
will, may be saved.' Mr. Benedict then arose and 
said ' agreed.' I then requested the congrega- 
tion to take notice that Mr. Benedict agreed with 
me, and therefore renounced Calvinism. Mr. Wil- 
liston, my present polemic, then arose and said, 
" Mr. Benedict do come out — come out I beseech 
of you." ' We!!,' said he, ' if it be thought best 
I will.' Accordingly, as near as I can recollect, 
he expressed himself as follows — ' I believe God 
from all eternity elected a certain number to eter- 
nal life, not because he foresaw they would repent 
and believe, but because he would ; and that he 
reprobated all the rest to eternal burnings, not be- 
cause he foresaw them sinners, but because he 
would' ! This, thought I, is " coming out," w^ith a 
witness. This is as accurate an account of this 
matter, as 1 am able to give. I believe some of the 
persons then present, can remember the circum- 
stances. If Mr, Williston retains them, I call upon 
him, in the fear of God, as he will have to answer 
at the great day, to confess the truth, and clear us 
of the scandal he has attempted to pour upon us, 
by misstating our sentiments upon this subject. — 
Let him lay his hand upon his breast, and, if he 
dare, contradict the above facts. When he has 
done it, it will, I believe, be no difficult matter for 
me to prove them. A consciousness of truth and 
honesty makes me bold, and a sense of responsi- 
bility has made me cautious. 1 do not, indeed, af- 
firm that I have every expression Sls was then used ; 
but that it is svhstantially correct, I am fully con- 
vinced 5 and especially the emphatical words 
foundation and condition j because the circumstan- 
ces made a deep and lasting impression on my 
mind ; and Mr- Benedict's conduct on that occa- 
fiion seemed exceeding strange, and was the sub- 



DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 153 

ject of much animadversion ; because it was well 
known that the Calvinisls held to the doctrine of 
unconditional election. 

This being as true a state of the case as I am 
able to give, I will now lay before the regider the 
reasons why I objected to Mr. Benedict's question, 
and shew, as plain as I can, that we do not make 
works, of any kind, the foundation either of our 
election or salvation. 

The reason then why we object to that phraseol- 
ogy is, because we believe the foundation of our 
election is the infinite goodness or lovt of God man- 
ifested in Christ Jesus, and because we perceive a 
material difterence between the foundation and the 
condition of our salvation* Suppose you were to 
see a man in danger of precipitating himself into 
some dj'eadful gulf, from which danger he could 
not extricate himself; and you were to pledge your- 
self to deliver him, if he would take hold of your 
hand — Would \\\e foundation of his deliverance be 
in your goodness and power, or in his taking hold 
of your hand ? His taking hold of your hand is 
the condition on which the unfortunate man is de- 
livered : but if your goodness had not first prompt- 
ed you to ofier him deliverance on this easy condi- 
tion ; and if your power had not been exerted in 
his behalf, he might have struggled in vain to save 
himself. His deliverance ihen primarily depended 
upon your goodness in making the offer, and on 
your power and faithfulness, in fulfilling your pro- 
mise. Even so — Nay more — does the salvation of 
the elect depend upon the goodness, power, and 
faithfulness of God, as to its origin or foundation. 
The gift of Jesus Christ, without which no one could 
have been saved, originated from pure benevolence: 
here is the proper foundation, as saith St. Paul : 
* Other foundation can no man lay than that which 
is laid, which is Christ Jesus,' Sinners, as they 



154 ON THE SCRIPTURE 

existed in Adam, were all hanging over the dismal 
abyss of perdition. To prevent them from precip- 
itating themselves into it, the wings of eternal love 
flew to their rescue — God gave his only Son a ran- 
som foi; them all — by which a broad and perma- 
nent /own toio/i was laid for them to build their 
hopes of happiness upon. 

And this ' unspeakable gift' depended, in no 
sense, upon any work, merit, or condition of man ; 
it came ujisought, unasked, and unmerited ; it ori- 
ginated entirely in the good pleasure, and unbound- 
ed benevolence of the triune God. So also the 
first visitations of the Word and Spirit to the hearts 
of sinners, now flow from the infinite good pleas- 
ure of God, unsought and unmerited by man, de- 
pending upon no conditions by man performed : 
but, that man may receive the full benefit of par- 
don and sanctification, he is required to repent, be- 
lieve in Jesus Christ as his Almighty Redeemer, 
and walk in the light as he is in the light. 

Now we ask — from whence did it originate that 
God devised and executed such an admirable 
scheme, so perfectly adapted to harmonize and il- 
lustrate the divine perfections, and suited with 
such exactitude to the condition of man ? Whence 
originated that offer of eternal salvation upon condi' 
tions so small and insignificant in themselves, when 
compared to the greatness and infinite value of that 
salvation, which penitent, believing, and obedient 
sinners receive ? We answer, from the infinite 
goodness of God : This is its source. It was un- 
bounded goodness, or eternal love, that brought 
Jesus Christ, our adored Saviour, from heaven, to 
cover himself with shame and ignominy, to expire 
amid surrounding wonders, and the most exquisite 
pangs, that he might atone for the sin of the world. 
Let angels adore with wonder and astonishment ! 
Let devils tremble ! Let saints shout, and sinners 



DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 155 

hear, fear, and exultingly return unto God — while 
they meditate upon the stupendous love, which led 
Christ to the bloody cross ! Was the decree of re- 
probation executed at this awful moment, when the 
mighty Saviour uttered his expiring groan ? No ; 
but the decree of universal love v.as exemplified, 
and demonstrated in the view of both worlds. — 
What heart can avoid dilating with gratitude while 
meditating upon these scenes where justice and 
grace are beheld so delightfully harmonizing. Yes, 
and it is goodness which now moves the holy Trini- 
ty to awaken and enlighten sinners, to reveal the 
way of life and salvation to them, to enable them 
to accept of pardon and salvation upon those terms 
which the same property of the divine nature had 
aiccommodated to the weak, polluted, and guilty 
condition of man. It is this same eternal good- 
ness and power, which pardons, sanctifies, defends, 
succours, comforts and delivers God's people in 
this world of sin, pollution, dangers, sorrows, and 
difficulties. Here then we see \.\\q foundation^ the 
fountain, or source of our present and future feli- 
city. But the conditions on which we receive par- 
don, sanctification, and final salvation, are repent- 
ance, faith, and perseverance in a holy life to the 
end of our probationary existence. Now, it is pre- 
sumed, that if Mr. W. cannot see any reason to 
alter his opinion, the impartial reader will conclude 
that, to satisfy his conscience, he ought. 

From what has been said, it will be perceived 
that we neither/o?mrf election upon works foreseen, 
nor upon foreknowledge. It is true this election is 
predicated, that is declared or affirmed of foreknowl- 
edge : but foreknowledge is not its foundation or 
source, any more than works, whether of piety or 
mercy. Foreknowledge sees those who will be 
benefited by that grace which flows from the abun- 
dant goodness of God ; and accordingly the in- 



156 ON THE SCRIPTURE 

spired writers affirm that the * saints were elected 
according^ that is in exact conformity * to the fore- 
knowledge of God through sanctification of the 
Spirit.' 

But Mr. W. affirms that there is nothing in my 
book that has led him to suppose we did not make 
works the foundation of our election. Were I cer- 
tain that all our readers could have access to that 
book, I would only refer them to it, that they might 
see with what prejudice, or inattention, our oppo- 
nent has read it. Lest, however, this should not 
be the case, I will here transcribe a Utile from p. p. 
108, 109. ' If a beggar were to receive from the 
hands of a wealthy benevolent man, something to 
supply his wants, does it follow that the ac/of the 
beggar in receiving the gratuitous donation from 
his benefactor, is {h^ foundation or meritorious cause 
of his subsistence ? By no means. The benevolence 
of the donor, and not the act of the beggar, is the 
source of the poor man's subsistence.' — ' The source 
of all the favours bestowed on fallen man, is in the 
plenitude of divine goodness. It was infinite con- 
descension in God that caused him to provide a 
Saviour for sinners, and to accommodate the terms 
of acceptance and salvation to the weakness of 
man. The question is not, therefore, as your read- 
ers might infer, whether our election to eternal life 
be predicated of works or of grace ; but whether 
grace, the grace of eternal life, be unconditionally 
bestowed on some, and whether all the rest be un- 
conditionally reprobated to eternal death, without 
any respect to their wicked works. Ail the scrip- 
tures therefore which you have quoted to prove 
that grace is the first and moving cause of our sal- 
vation, make nothing against us ; and all you say 
against works being the foundation of our election, 
is wide of the point, as we never held they were.' 
If the =:cales of prejudice have not entirely blinded 



DOCTRFNE OF ELECTION. 157 

the eyes of his understanding, if he read this quota- 
tion, I hope it will make so deep an impression as 
to induce Mr. W. to alter his opinion, and retract 
his unsupported assertions. Unsupported asser- 
tions ! Have I not supported them by quotations 
Voni your book of discipline ? 

1 believe not, Sir : Let us, however, attend to 
this ])oint. The first passage he has referred to is 
the following, p. 62. ' The scriptures tell us plain- 
ly what predestination is : it is God's fore appoint- 
ing obedient believers to salvation, not without, 
but according to his foreknowledge of all their 
works from the foundation of the world' — ' If the 
elect are chosen through sanctification of the Spir- 
it, then they are not chosen before they are sanc- 
tified by the Spirit.' From these passages Mr, 
Williston concludes that we " build electing love 
on good works foreseen." But I believe it will be 
very dijficult for any considerate person to per- 
ceive from what part of those arguments he has 
drawn his conclusion : it being manifest that the 
author says not one word about the original cause^ 
but only speaks of the time and the means of our 
election. We could wish that our enemies would 
pay a little more attention to the meaning of words, 
especially those which ought to be, and are, em- 
phaticaL I fear we shall appear ridiculous in the 
estimation of an enlightened public, by being under 
the necessity of descending to such minute expla- 
nations, as though we suspected the understand- 
ings of our readers. 

Mr. Wesley's argument, in the above quotation, 
is this; St. Paul affirms that the saints are elected 
through sanctification of the Spirit ; but inasmuch 
as they could not be sanctified before they were 
born ; therefore they were not elected in eternity, 
but in time, when they were sanctified. He says 
not one word respecting the foundation^ or origin' 

o 



X58 OF THE SCRIPTURE 

al cause of election, in either of the passages Mr. 
W. has quoted. 

Why did he not quote the following, which stand 
so closely connected with those he did quote, and 
which speak directly of the foundation or cause of 
election ? The reason is obvious to every impartial 
mind. They prove directly against Mr. Williston's 
assertion, and inference. The reader shall judge. 
* I do not hold that' (faith and obedience) ' is the 
cause for which he elects any ; the contrary of this 
is easily shewn thus : Suppose my obedience the 
cause of my election to (eternal) salvation, What 
is the cause of my obedience ? Answer : My love 
to Christ. But w^hat is the cause of my love to 
Christ ? Answer : My faith in Christ. But what is 
the cause of my faith in Christ ? Answer : The 
preaching of the gospel of Christ, But what is the 
cause of the preaching of the gospel of Christ ? 
AnswTr : Christ dying for us. But what is the 
cause of Christ dying for us ? Answer : God's great 
love of pity, wherewith he loved us, even when we 
were dead in trespasses and sins. Thus all men 
may see that I do not hold, God chose any man to 
life and salvation for any good which he had done, 
or for any which was in him, before he put it there.' 
These sentiments of Mr. Wesley are all supported 
by apposite texts of scripture, which the reader 
may see, either by looking in ithe Discipline pub- 
lished in 1808, or in a' small book called Doctrinal 
Tracts^ published by the Methodists. In page 66 
of the Discipline, are these words : ' God's love 
was the cause of his sending Ihs Son to die for us. 
Christ's dying for sinners is the cause of the gospel 
being preached. The preaching of the gospel is 
the cause, or means of our believing. Our believ- 
ing is the cause, or condition of our justification.' 

The reader may now decide what credit is due 
to Mr. W's bold affirmation, that we make works 



©OCTRINE OF ELECTIQrs% Iqd 

foreseen the foundation of our salvation. Ts not 
the original cause the proper foundation, ascribed 
by Mr. Wesley in the above quotations, to the love 
of God ^ and also carefully, and scripturally dis- 
tinguished from the conditional or instrumental 
cause of justification, and eternal glory ? 

But, says Mr. Williston, p. 75, '' It is objected 
by our theological antagonists, That there is more 
than one passage where predestination is explicitly 
ascribed to foreknowledge, and made to rest upon 
it.*'* Here is another grand mistake. We have no 
ivhcre said that predestination rests upon foreknow- 
ledge, or is ascribed to it. It no more rests upon 
it, than Mr. Williston's book rests on my eye, 
merely because I see it. I affirm that there is such 
a book, containing a number of mistaken assertions, 
because I sec^ and therefore knoio it ; but because 1 
see that book, and I'ead those assertions, does it 
lullow that I wrote the book, and am the cau^e of 

* iJr. \V iris! on haf], 1 grant, some reason for the above as- 
crtiun, from a sentence in my book, (which, liowever, be has 
not ref-P rd u\] p. 1-23 ; where it is said ' Whatever clcctiott 
the ai isUe ha J in view, it. is c* rtain he founded it upon;>r€- 
fcitme.^ ITcrc the worA foumled is 'i^ed in an improper sense, 
and conveys a 'iilFerent idea fr<jm what 1 intcnderl, althoug-h it 
conveys no idea of election he\x\<^ founded upon zco7*.V* foreseen. 
This inaccura<v is corrected in a revised copy, 1 have to print 
by, if a seco.^1 edition of (bat worJt should be called for. In- 
stead of readirijf, that the apostle /bi/^i/i^rf elect'on upon pre- 
science, it now reads, he predknied or cjjh-med it of pre^^cience. 
Hut if Mr. VVilfistOQ had attended to what is wrilteo p. p. 108, 
lOf), of my letters »o bitn, he raigrhl have seen that we utterly 
disj.laimthe pharasaic doctrine of salvat'on by works, whetlter 
of obedience lo law, or of repentance and faith. Considering-, 
however, the inaccuracy above noticed m the use of the word 
founded, 1 excuse Mr. SV. in saying that I hdive founded e\cc' 
"lion upon foreknow ledi,^c. But I wish him also (o accept of 
this explanition ; and request him in future to understand us 
according to our mcani;ig, wtiich may be gathered from our 
leading principles, and not from an expression inadvertently 
used in an improper sense. For the sentiments we hold, we 
ask no mercy, no favour. If they be heterodox, let them be 
rooted frojn the churcb : the sooner the better. 



160 OF TfTET SCRIPTURE 

those assertions? I also see our discipline, fi-om 
which 1 have made the above quotations to refute 
Mr. Ws misstatements of our doctrines, and of 
which I highly approve ; and therefore I affirm that 
there is such a book; and this affirmation is pre- 
dicated of my knozoleclg€ that such a book exists : 
but does it hence follow that the book itself must be 
ascribed to my knowledge, and be made to rest on 
my eye ? God, according to the language of inspi- 
ration, foresaw who would believe, and who would 
not; and hence it is said that election and salvation 
h predicated or affirmed of that knowledge, and not 
that it rests upon it. 

To make this subject intelligible to every reader, 
let us ask ; How came God to know how many or 
how any would be saved ? Answer 1. Because his 
infinite goodness inclined him to provide a Saviour, 
and all necessary means for their salvation. 2, 
Because infinite knowledge, being one of the per- 
fections of his nature, it enabled him to see and 
know who would, and w'ho would not, accept of 
that Saviour, and submit to his prescribed method 
of salvation. Prescience, therefore, although it 
beheld the whole system of events, good and bad, 
did not produce them. No, it was /ore, mighty 
love, or unbounded goodness, that induced our be- 
nevolent God to condescend to choose those for 
himself, whom he foresaw would yield to the gra- 
cious terms of salvation. * Herein is love, not that 
we (first) ioved God, but that He (first) loved us, 
and sent his Son to be a propitiation for our sins.' 

Nowf for the sake of trulh and candour, and for 
the honour of our religion, I hope we may hear no 
more the stale charge reiterated, that we make 
works the foundation oi' our election. If, however, 
any choose still to report this slander, a simple adf- 
▼ertisement of its untruth is all the reply they will 
deserve. 



DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 161 

In p. 86, Mr. W. says he thinks I do not " un^ 
derstand them when they speak of election as be- 
ing unconditional." It may be so. But I believe 
it is not very difficult to understand them unless 
they pervert langua.e;e. I understand by Calvin- 
islic election, that God, from all eternity chose a 
certain number of men and angels, to eternal life, 
and that he eternally reprobated all the rest to 
eternal burnings ; and I understand by uncondition^ 
al something without any conditions ; and there- 
fore by unconditional election I understand that God 
according to his own sovereign pleasure, elected a 
certain number of his intelligent beings to eternal 
life, entirely independent of any conditions by 
them performed ; but that certain conditions, such 
as repentance, faith and obediejice flow from this 
decree of election as the fruits of it ; and that God, 
accordiiig to his own sovereign pleasure reprobated 
unconditioyially all the rest of his intelligent beings 
to eternal torments, without any condition by them 
performed ; but that certain conditions, such as 
impenitence, unbelief, disobedience, &c. flow from 
this unconditional doc ree of reprobation, as the 
fruits of it. If this be not a tine defii ition, then, I 
confess, I do not understand them. 

Now I know of no medium between uncondilion' 
al and conditional election ; The latter tee btlieve ; 
but the Calvinists oppose us ; theicfore they can- 
not believe in conditional elociion : ihey must then 
believe in unconditional election. Ho.vever, Mr. 
W. says, p. 87, that I have siatcd the que?tion 
wrong in saying, ' The i^tlB'^stion is, whether grace, 
the grace of eternal life beiirr '-jur-Ay bestow- 

ed on some : He says, • I ' •'■ is far 'VutJi be- 

ing the question : Goii be. , grace of eter- 

nal life on none but penitent s ; but he be- 

stows the grace of icpcnta; ^ faith on tf>ose 

who were dead in sin." But :^vjce of re- 

o ij. 



1 



1G2 OF THE SCRIPTURE 

pentance and faith a condition of election ? If it be 
said, yes, then unconditional election is renounced. 
If it be said no, then is unconditional election as- 
serted. The former sentiment is ours ; and if Mr, 
W. believe in it, why does he oppose us ; but if not, 
why does he insinuate that I have, from ignorance 
of his doctrine, stated the question wrong ? Does 
he hold to an unconditional -conditio^ial election I If 
he docs, he will confer a favour on us, to explain 
what is the meaning of such election. If he does 
not, as he opposes our doctrine of conditional elec- 
tion, he must hold to unconditional election ; and I 
do not apprehend that that phrase is so mysterious, 
that a person of a moderate understanding cannot 
comprehend it. 

The plain state of the case appears to be this : — 
^0 pointed are the scriptures against his doctrine 
of unconditional election, and so conclusive the ra- 
tional arguments which have been brought against 
it, that our antagonist, to evade their force, resorts 
to this miserable subterfuge, to affect some sem- 
blance of consistency. Every body who has at- 
tended to this subject, knows that the Calvinists, 
tind Hopkinsians hold to unconditional election and 
reprobation. What the latter say about the con- 
ditions of the covenant of grace is a mere fallacy ; 
For they believe, not only that the decree of elec- 
tion is unconditional, but that a sinner is regene- 
rated, and, of course is infallibly certain of eternal 
life, without any conditions ; repentance, faith, &c. 
«!re all subsequent to regeneration, and are as infal- 
libly secured in the eternal decree of election, as 
is the salvation of the elect, or the damnation of 
the reprobate. Why then does Mr. W. evince 
such a solicitude to evade this point ? Is he not 
conscious of his inability to defend himself upon 
the open field of Hopkinsianism ? Or does he wish 
to impose upon the public a belief that he has re» 



DOCTRINE OF ELECTION. 163 

nouhced unconditional decrees, election and repro- 
bation ? Why (hen so violently oppose us who nev- 
er believed that doctrine ? But, if he have become 
a convert to the truth, why not throw away the am- 
biguity of language and frankly declare his con- 
version ? This certainly would be much more hon- 
ourable than such manifest evasion as he has evin- 
ced ? / say Mr, W* holds to unconditional election 
and reprobation. Now, if he do not, let him deny 
it, and the dispute between him and us is ended — 
He has renounced that part of Calvinism and IIop- 
kinsianisra, and set his seal to the truth of our doc- 
trine. But if he does hold td it, then his observa- 
tions are mere quibling. He may chose which of 
these alternatives pleases him best. 

Moreover, Mr. W. not only makes election en- 
tirely independent of any condition, but also regen- 
eration. This last he supposes precedes repent- 
ance and faith, and is eflected without any condi- 
tion to be performed by man whatever ; and he 
also supposes that all who are regenerated, are 
saints, in the way to heaven, and cannot possibly 
fail of everlasting felicity : Accordingly sinners 
are not only unconditionally chosen to eternal life, 
but are regenerated, born of the Spirit, and sure of 
eternal life, before they either repent or believe, 
that is, before any condition is performed by them» 
is not this unconditional election and salvation ? 

In p. 89, Mr.W. complains that 1 have perverted 
his sentiments. Jn his sermon, p. 63, he said, " It 
is not assigning a sufficient reason for their repro- 
bation to say they were wicked and would not ac- 
cept of mercy," This passage 1 quoted in my let- 
ter ; and after referring to Eph. v. 5. observed, that 
either Paul, Jesus Christ, or Mr. W. was mistaken. 
On this he asks ; " Did the author of the letters 
imdersland me to say, that something besides wick- 
edness was the guilti^ and deserving cause of the 



164 or TII£ SCRIPTURE 

destruction of the wicked?" To this 1 answeiv 
That I understood him just as he said, namely, 
" That it was not assigning a sufficient reason for 
their reprobation to say they were wicked and 
would not accept of mercy." I know that Mr. W. 
assigned other reasons ; but as those other reasons 
were not sanctioned by the word of God, were we 
obliged to assent to them ? As the scriptures know 
nothing of his doctrine o{ compelling some sinners to 
repentance, and of compelling others to sin and 
impenitence, so we know nothing of those other 
reasons mentioned by the vindicator ; and which 
can only " have force" with those who embrace his 
contradictory notions of irresistible influence. He 
asserted, and I understood him according to the plain, 
literal meaning of his words, " that wickedness is 
not a sufficient reason for the reprobation of the wick- 
ed ;" and I understood that the sacred scriptures 
assign that as the onli/ reason why the wicked are 
reprobated : To support this idea I quoted several 
texts, one of which was ; ' And for this cause God 
shall send them strong delusions, that they may 
believe a lie ; that they all might be damned who 
believe not the truths but have pleasure in unright- 
eousness.' 2 Thess. ii. 10,11. The wickedness 
of sinners, therefore, and their refusal to accept of 
mercy are the only reasons which the scriptures 
assign for the punishment of reprobates ; but Mr. 
W. says these are not sufficient ; therefore he as- 
signs others, drawn from his human doctrine of de- 
crees, to which the scriptures are perfect strangers \ 
and hence I said he is wiser in his own conceited 
system, than Jesus Christ and his servant Paul — 
and therefore he accuses me of perverting his sen- 
timents! Judge, candid reader, between us. 

It is most desirable to bring this controversy in- 
to as narrow a compass as possible •, and there- 
fore I omit examining all Mr, W.'s arguments, not 



DOCTRINE OP ELECTION. 165' 

)nly, however, to avoid prolixity, but because ma- 
ny of them are wide of the point. The scriptures 
cjuoted and explained in my letters lo him, and his 
remarks upon (hem, arc open to all who v;ish to 
consult them; and those who do, are at liberty 
lo form their judgment on the merits of the ques- 
tion, according to the light of truth. Indeed, the 
]>rincipal i)art of this chapter has been expended in 
rectifying his mistakes, flow much time and la- 
bour mi^ht have been saved, (if his doctrine is 
false.) Besides, if his doctrine of universal de- 

rees has been proved erroneous, as I think it has, 
as his doctrine of election is formed upon tltat^ this 
must also fall to the ground. And as that subject 
lias been largely investigated in the first chaj)tcr 
of this work, it would be supertluous to reply to all 
his arguments in this place, most of which are to- 
tally foreign from the point. See, however, the 
next chapter. 

But, it is matter of no small importance for eve- 
ry one (0 moke a practical application of this sub- 
ject to his own iieart and life. As it is an unques- 
tionable truth, every where shining in the sacred 
pages, that God's love is impartially manifested to 
all liie human family, in the gift of Jesus Christ, 
who tasted death for every man, it is highly impor- 
tant for every one to see that he makes his calling 
and election sure. The goodness of God is most 
gloriously illustrated in making ample provision 
for (he present and eternal salvation of every indi- 
vidual. How base then, and how totally inexcusa- 
ble are all those who live and die in their sins ! A 
thousand faithful warnings are given to sinners in 
the day of their merciful visitation ; and they are 
designed by the benevolent Father of our spirits, to 
arrest the sinner in his progress of iniquity ; to 
convince him of his sinful ingratitude, and his un- 
natural rebellion 5 and linally to bring him to the 



166 OF THE SCRIPTURE 

foot of the cross, that he may eventually be saved 
everlastingly. No imposing decree of eternal and 
unconditional reprobation is found written on any 
of the ways or works of God, to frighten the bur- 
dened sinner away from the mercy of God. No, 
the door of mercy is opened to all returning prodi- 
gals, who are willing to bow to the immutable 
terms of salvation. 

But, says Mr. W. '' While you say 3/awr doctrine 
does not present the barrier of unconditional repro- 
bation in the way of the sinner, we say, neither 
does it present any merciful decree of election to 
open the path," p. 100. To this we answer, 
There is a merciful decree of election which opens 
the path to all men. The bars of the Adamic cov- 
enant are broken asunder by the Almighty Re- 
deemer, and all in their infant state are included in 
this merciful decree of election — ' By the righteous- 
ness of one, the free gift is come upon all men unto 
Justification of life.' Through the atoning merits of 
Christ, and the merciful agency of the Holy Spirit, 
all probationary sinners are empowered to repent, 
believe in Christ and be saved. God by no means 
leaves them under the absolute control of the car- 
nal mind, or to the native perversity of their de- 
praved hearts 4 but he kindly interferes in their be- 
half, urging them by a thousand endearing motives 
to forsake their sins, return unto him, and live. — - 
Nay; He operates directly upon their hearts by 
his Spirit, with a view to work in them conviction, 
repentance and salvation ; using all the means for 
this end, which are consistent with man's responsi- 
ble agency. He neither entices them to sin, nor 
forces them to holiness: but he restrains them, 
checks and dissuades them from sin ; draws and 
persuades them to holiness and happiness. And 
whatevei'' weakness, wickedness, or aversion to 
good, they mayjiave, his offered grace is all suffix 



DOCTRIIS'E OF ELECTION. 167 

cient to strengthen, overcome, and convert ihem, 
whenever they yield to his requisitions. 

What more is necessary to "open their path?" 
Must God, in order to save them, unman them, by 
converting them into mechanical agents ? This, in- 
deed would open their way efiectually ! by render- 
ing them as incapable of acceptable service, as 
brutes and stones. 

We therefore call upon mankind to return unto 
God and live. The doctrine we teach fixes the 
culpability of criminal conduct 'upon the sinner 
himself; and exhibits an impartial God, who will 
one day vindicate the claims of his inflexible jus- 
tice in the perpetual condemnation of those who 
wilfully and perseveringly refuse to accept of sal- 
vation in the name of Jesus Christ : and it also pro- 
claims an Almighty Saviour, every way suited in 
his character, offices, and the cfRcg^^y of his blood, 
to the guilty, helpless, and impure state of the sin- 
ner. It reveals the Holy Spirit, whose divine ope- 
rations distil as the gentle dew upon the mown 
grass, or as the showers of rain upon the parched 
field, to revive the languishing souls of men, and to 
raise their lapsed powers to divine favour, peace, 
joy, and everlasting felicity. 

May God help all who read these lines to make 
a saving experiment of these inesilmabic truths to 
their own hearts, and to exhibit their superlative 
excellence in practical life. 



IGS ON THE POSSIBILITY 01' 

CHAPTER IV. 

On the possihility of final und total apostacy, 

1 place this subject next in order, because Mr. 
Williston's manner of treating it, so closely con- 
nects it with his doctrine of election, that the two 
subjects seem interwoven. It appears indeed, ne- 
cessarily to follow, that if God have unconditional- 
ly elected a definite number to life everlasting, that 
such and only such will be regenerated ; and when 
regenerated cannot so fall as to perish forever. — 
Why should God regenerate a reprobate ? and how 
can one of the elect be finally lost ? - , 

To support the doctrine of the possibility of total 
apostacy, I shall attempt 1 . By direct scripture 
testimony to shew that Mr. W*s. doctrine of uncon- 
ditional election is erroneous. 2. That his view 
of the covenant of redemption, according to his 
own concessions, is inconsistent v/ith scripture, 
and the sacred harmony of truth. 3. That his ar- 
guments on this subject, are inconclusive. ,4. The 
truth of our doctrine shall then be proved from ex- 
plicit scripture testimony. 

1. If the sacred scriptures unequivocally assert 
that eternal life is conditional^ then, as they cannot 
give a false testimony by contradicting themselves, 
the doctrine of unconditional election to eternal 
life cannot be true. In regard to God having an 
eternal purpose respecting every event, in particu- 
Jar, respecting the scheme of redemption, and the 
decree of election, we have no disposition to contro- 
vert ; but this eternal purpose is no hidden counsel 
to counteract his own laws by influencing men to 
sin ; nor no secret design to fix unchangeably and 
■unconditionally, the eternal states of men : but this 
purpose and decree are explicitly revealed in the 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY. 169 

holy scriptures : and this revelation declares the 
unalterable determination of God to save and to 
condemn sinners conditionally. 

That this is according to the light of scripture, 
is abundantly manifest. John iii. 14 — 20. 'For 
God so loved the world, that he gave his only be* 
gotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him, 
should not perish, but have everlasting life' — He 
that BELIEVETH not is condemned already, because 
he hath not believed in the name of the only bie- 
gotten Son of God,' &:c. Whoever will read the 
above passages attentively, will perceive the con* 
dition of eternal life expressed not less than sev' 
en times, and that the condition is considered so es- 
sential that the salvation of the one depended upon 
its performance, and the damnation of the other up- 
on its non-performance. Now admitting that some 
of -the human family were unconditionally elected to 
eternal life, is it not most likely that Jesus Christ, 
who cafto-to interpret the will of his heavenly Fath- 
er, would have varied his expressions ? especially 
in such an emphatical clause of his discourse, in 
which he expressly and formally asserts the grand 
design of God the Father in sending his Son into 
the world ? If it had been his intention to make an 
explicit declaration of the will of God, and if that 
will was exhibited in having elected some to eter- 
nal life without any respect to their faith and obe- 
dience, would he not have expressed it in the most 
imequivocal manner ? But no such thing is even 
suggested in the above words. On the contrary, 
it is declared, and repeated no less than seven 
times, in the compass of seven verses, that our elec- 
tion to eternal life, and reprobation to eternal death, 
are suspended on conditions ; and that too, in con- 
nexion with a set and formal discourse with a learn- 
ed, inquisitive, and ingenuous master in Israel, to 
whom our Lord was explaining the benevolent de- 

p 



170 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

sign of his mission into the world. If the calvinis- 
tic doctrine of election were true, what a fit oppor- 
tunity this for the Son of God, who came, not only 
to make an atonement for sin, but also to interpret 
the will of his Father, to have asserted this doc- 
trine. 

Hear the same inimitable teacher again, while 
conversing with the woman of Samaria, respecting 
the will of his heavenly Father : ' But whosoever 
DRiNKETH of the watcr that I shall give him, shall 
never thirst ; but the water that I shall give him, 
shall be in him a well of water, springing up unto 
everlasting life,' John iv. 14. Why did not our 
Lord, if unconditional election had been true, de- 
clare frankly, that all whom the Father had chosen 
from eternity should drink of that water, and should 
inevitably be saved everlastingly ? To quote all 
the scriptures which make reperiiance, faith, loving, 
walking in the light, and keeping the commandments 
of God, conditions of eternal life, would be ib trans- 
cribe a great part of the bible. And, it is believed, 
that it would be extremely difficult for the uncondi- 
tional decretists to bring a single text, which, in so 
many words asserts, that God hath unconditionally 
elected some, and unconditionally reprobated all the 
rest. Now as the conditionality of the decree ot 
election is plainly expressed in so many places, 
the contrary doctrine cannot be true. And if that 
doctrine is not true, as eternal life is suspended on 
conditions, then, if a believer fail to fulfil the con- 
ditions, he has no promise of eternal life ; and hence 
no conclusive argument in favour of the infallible 
perseverance of all who have been regenerated, can 
be drawn from the doctrine of election. 

" No text which asserts the doctrine of uncondi- 
tional election ? Examine the following celebrated 
passages." ' God hath from the beginning chosen 
vQu to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit, 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY. 171 

and belief of the truth.' 2 Thes. ii. 13. We will 
examine them. Here are two things mentioned as 
the condition, or means of their salvation ; namely, 
sanctif cation of the Spirit, and belief of the truth: 
these are the medium through which these persons 
were chosen. How then could they have been 
chosen in eternity, seeing their sanctification and 
belief of the truth, the expressed means of their elec- 
tion, were both in time^ after they were born, and 
when they willingly embraced the Lord Jesus Christ, 

' Elect according to the foreknowledge of God 
the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto 
jlDcdience, and sprinkling of the blood of Christ.' 
1 Pet. i. 2. 

If the apostle Peter had been initiated into the 
modem doctrine of predestination, would he not 
have accommodated his language to that doctrine, 
and have said, Elect according to the /br<'orc?mG^^o/l 
of God the Father, through " €/ec/m^ love," which 
he from all eternity determined to bestow on a few 
chosen ones, to the utter exclusion of all the hated 
reprobates ? Instead, however, of expressing this 
heterodox sentiment, he declares election of fore- 
knowledge, and asserts that it is through the medium 
of the sanctification of the Spirit and the sprinkling 
of the blood of Christ, Our doctrine could not 
have been expressed in more unequivocal language. 

Let us once more look at that noted passage in 
Rom. viii. 29, 30. ' For whom he did foreknow, 
he also did predestinate,' (S:c. What a convenient 
opportunity was this, if the apostle had been an un- 
conditional decretist, to have said, ' For whom he 
predestinatediohe conformed to the imageof his Son, 
them he diho forckmezu would be called,^ <kc. This 
would have placed the apostle's sentiments beyond 
the reach of controversy, and have classed him with 
unconditional predestinarians. But, as it now 
stands, it never can, without manifestly wresting it 



172 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

from its primitive meaning, be called to aid in sup- 
port of Calvinistic election ; because the apostle 
affirms his doctrine of election of God's foreknow- 
ledge^ 2Lr\d. not oi his for eordination. Indeed, were 
we to understand the apostle as speaking of divine 
prescience absolutely and wmrer5«//y, without having 
any respect to men's faith and obedience, we should 
make him contradict, not only himself in numerous 
passages, but also the general tenor of God's word ; 
and introduce a doctrine which is subversive of 
the whole gospel scheme ; I mean universalism. 

* For whom he did foreknow^'' &;c. Is not God's 
knowledge infinite ? Were not all mankind known 
to him from eternity ? If so, and if all who were 
thus foreknown were unconditionally predestinated 
to be corformed to the suffering, patient and submis- 
sive, image of Christ ; and were called, justifiedj 
and glorified, then universal salvation follows. But, 
the Calvinists no more believe this destructive doc- 
trine than we do ; although of the two systems, uni* 
versalism is less dishonourable to God than Cal- 
vinism. That, therefore, could not have been the 
meaning of the apostle. But the plain, scriptural 
meaning undoubtedly is, Whom he foreknew as be- 
lieving, &:c. either among Jews or Gentiles, He 
predestinated to be conformed to the image of Jesus 
Christ, as the means of their salvation. So also, at 
the conclusion of that sublime, and inimitable pas- 
sage, in which the Apostle unfolds the eternal and 
immutable determination of God, to send the glad 
tidings of salvation to the Gentile world, it is said, 

* After ye believed ye were sealed with that holy 
spirit of promise,' Eph. i. 13. How any man can 
attentively read, and understandingly consider the 
leading design of the inspired writers in the above 
passages of scripture, without perceiving the condi- 
tionality of election and salvation, it is difficult to 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY 17 



o 



conceive. See these passages all more largely con- 
sidered in my letters to Mr. W. p. 31-57. 

The argument inferable from the whole is ; If 
our election and salvation are conditional, as the 
sacred scriptures most evidently declare ; and as a 
condition binding upon mutable beings as man- 
kind are, supposes the possibility of not being com- 
plied with ; then the doctrine of unconditional elec- 
tion, and its twin doctrine of infallible perseverance 
are false : — Hence also the possibility of final and 
total apostacy is established upon the firm rock of 
truth* 

2. Let us, in the second place, attend to Mr. W.'s 
representation of the covenant of redemption. Let 
it be remembered, however, that it is no part of the 
present enquiry, whether this covenant were made 
in eternity between the persons of the God-head 4 
neither was this question made a subject of much 
importance in my letter to Mr. W. although he has 
laboured much to show, that it is possible such a 
covenant might have been made between persons 
cc-equal, co-eternal, and eternally subsisting-in Tri- 
nity of Unity, and Unity of Trinity. The possi- 
bility of such a concert, and covenant transaction, 
being, so far as the present controversy is concern- 
ed, a mere point of speculation, 1 shall not stop to 
dispute : Thus much, however, f will venture to af- 
firm, that I never yet have seen any scriptures quo- 
ted, either by Mr. W. or any one else, that do by 
any candid construction, support such a doctrine. 
1 have read the learned Witsius on the covenants 
with some attention, and deeply considered all Mr. 
W. has said and many others, and that with a sim- 
ple desire to know the truth ; and the result has 
been, a belief that the existence of such a covenant, 
>s a chimera of men's invention. Leaving, how- 
ever, the consideration of this subject to others, let 

p 2 



174 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

US see whether, if there be such a covenant, Mr, W. 
has accurately defined it. 

It should be distinctly understood that he infers 
the certain and infallible perseverance of all who 
have been regeneratecL from this covenant of re- 
demption ; of course he limits the provisions of it to 
theiti) and to them only. " The very idea," says 
he, " of some being chosen, in distinction from 
others, supposes the others not to be thus chosen." 
p. 92. I have read his section upon this subject 
with the deepest attention, and think, that 1 have 
not misapprehended his meaning. Indeed if he do 
not infer the certain perseverance of the regene- 
rated from the supposition tjiat Christ secured their 
eternal salvation by fulfilling his covenant engage- 
ments, then his doctrine of redemption can have no 
kind of bearing upon the present controversy. This 
covenant, he moreover observes, contains no other 
conditions than what were fulfilled by the Divine 
persons themselves, (see p. 149 of his book;) of 
course the provisions of it, or blessings flowing 
from it,' do not depend in any manner upon condi- 
tions to be performed by men. And yet, according 
to him, the covenant of grace is conditional ; that is, 
man must perform conditions before he can have 
that eternal life which Christ secured for him, by 
fulfilling for him the only conditions which were re- 
quired in the covenant of redemption ! But if the 
infallible perseverance of the elect flows from the 
covenant of redemption, the conditions of which co- 
venant were fulfilled by the divine persons them- 
selves, how can the salvation of the elect depend in 
any measure on conditions to be performed by them ? 
If any one can intelligibly explain this mystery, 
and obviate the manifest inconsistencies of this doc- 
mne, they will aflbrd some evidence of its truth. 

One principal object of my letter to Mr. W. on 
this subject, was, to shew, that, according to his 
own concessions, his ideas of the covenant of re- 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY. 175 

demption ^vere erroneous. And, that they are. I 
shall now attempt more particularly to evince. 

He acknowledges, both in his sermons and in his 
vindication, that Christ died for all men without 
exception. Now, if there were a covenant trans- 
action " between the Father, the Word, and the Ho- 
ly Ghost, concerning the redemption of sinners," 
as Mr. W. affirms, (p. 140.) it must have been con- 
cerning Christ's dying for sinners ; for, without his 
death there could have been no redemption. And 
that this reputed covenant must have had respect 
to the death of Christ, is evident from those scrip- 
tures to which Mr. W. refers his readers. ' Surely 
he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows : 
yet we did esteem him stricken, and smitten of 
God' — ' And he made his grave with the wicked, 
and with the rich in his death? — ' Yet it pleased the 
Lord to bruise him ; he hath put him to grief: when 
thou shah make his soul an oiVcring for sin, he shall 
see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the 
pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand.' 
Isaiah liii. 4 — 10. That this celebrated passage 
of prophetic scripture, pointed to the sufferings and 
dtath of Jesus Christ, must be evident to all who 
read it attentively. The inference drawn from this 
fact is, that, if in the covenant of Redemption 
Christ engaged to die for sinners, and if by his 
death he made atonement for all mankind^ as the 
scriptures plainly assert, and Mr. W. admits, then 
his notion respecting \\iG provisions of this covenant 
being restricted to only afew^ which few must ine- 
vetably persevere to the end, is manifestly erro- 
neous. This is the view which was taken of this 
subject in my letter ; and I cannot see how it is 
possible for my antagonist to avoid this conclusion. 
That he could not avoid it, is tacitly acknowledo;ed. 
by his passing over, in his vindication, all the scrip- 
tui'es and arguments I used to support this conclu- 



176 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

sion. If he considered those scriptures not appo- 
sitely applied, and the arguments fallacious, why- 
did he not detect their fallacy in his reply ? This 
would have benefited his cause much more, than 
merely fixing his attention upon a clause incident- 
ally inserted, from which no argument was drawn 
by me, and upon which no particular ^tress was 
laid, as to deciding the contested question at issue 
between us.* 

As it is highly probable some may read this 
work, who cannot have access to my letters to Mr. 
W. it is thought expedient to present to the reader 
those scriptures which are there quoted, with some 

* In my letter to Mr. W. upon-this subject, I said, ' It is 
truly surprising' that he should cite Psalm ex. 3. to prove that 
there was a covenant of redemption made between the persons 
of the godhead, who are essentially one, in eternity.' p. 216. 
Now I think it will appear manifest to every unprejudiced 
mind, that no particular stress was laid upon the essential umly 
of the Trinity, against the existence of a covenant of redemp- 
tion, i made it no ground of argument at all. And yet my 
antagonist is at great pains to prove the possibility of such a 
covenant between the Divine Persons. VV^ould he not, then, 
have employed his time to more purpose in canvassing my 
scripture proof against his notion of a par^i«/ scheme of redemp- 
tion, in distinction from the universality of the atonement, 
which last he acknowledges is scriptural ? I cannot find that he 
has even touched those scriptures ; nor fairly met one of the 
inferences drawn from them. 

When Mr. W. says, that the covenant -of redemption con- 
tains no other conditions than what were performed by the di- 
vine persons themselves, if he will extend the benefits of that 
covenant to all men in their infant state, and restrict its un- 
conditional benefits to them, and to the affording all men a 
probationary state, by which they are thereby enabled to re- 
pent, believe, and be saved, we entirely agree with him. 
For we always believed that Jesus Christ by his sufferings and 
death, unconditionally, that is, without any conditions required 
of man, set all men "free from the guilt o( Ada.in's sin, and 
thereby opened a door of mercy for all men. And so also all 
the provisions of the gospel, except justification, salvation, and 
eternal glory, are unconditionally bestowed upon mankind. 
These are the inestimable privifeges to which mankind are 
elected unconditionally. And all these flow from the plenitude 
of Divine goodness. 



FINAL A^^D TOTAL APO STACY. 177 

n the observations, which are all left unnoticed by 
him. * In regard to the work of » redemption ac- 
complished by Christ, the scriptures uniformly 
ascribe it to his death, to the shedding of his blood 
— 1 Pet. i. 18, 19. Yc were not redeemed with 
eorruptihle things — But with the precious blood of 
Christ, as of a lamb zdithont blemish, and without 
spot. Rev. V. 9. For thou hast redeemed us to 
God by thy blood. Gal. iv. 4, 5. But zohen ihefid- 
ness of time was come, God sent forth his Son, made 
of a woman, made under the lazv, To redeem them 
that were under the law, that wc might receive the 
adoption! of sons. Those who have redemption are 
said to have it through his blood, Eph. i. 7. In 
whom we have redExMPTIon through his blood, even 
the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his 
grace. In all these texts of scripture, which speak 
expressly on the subject of redemption, there is no 
information respecting a covenant " made between 
the persons of the God-head" for one part of man- 
kind only ; but they relate expressly to the suffer- 
ings and death of Jesus Christ. By admitting 
therefore that Christ died for all, you also admit 
that the scheme of redemption comprehended all ; 
so that your distinction between atonement and re- 
demption is utterly repugnant to scripture.' p. 226. 
The argument is this : If in the covenant of re- 
demption Jesus Christ engaged to redeem sinners 
by his death ; and if he did, by virtue of that en- 
gagement, actually die for all sinners, as the scrip- 
tures amply testify, and Mr. W. freely admits, then 
his views of this covenant, which restrict its provi- 
sions for only a part of sinners, are unscriptural 
and inconsistent with Mr. Williston himself; and 
therefore his inference, respecting the infallible per- 
severance of all who were comprehended in this 
covenant, is inconsequent, and contrary to the ex- 
press declarations of God's word, which affirms that 



178 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

some for whom Christ died, will finally perish, \i 
the death of Christ was the meritorious act by which 
his covenant engagements were accomplished ; and 
if by this act, he made complete atonement for all 
mankind ; and if all who were thus atoned for will 
infallibly be saved, then all will be saved ; but the 
holy scriptures most expressly declare that all will 
not be saved ; and therefore Mr. W.'s view of the 
covenant of redemption, and his inference from it, 
are both erroneous. 

This wqll more plainly appear from his conces- 
sions in his vindication. In p. 59, he says, " We 
believe that the interposition of the Redeemer has 
put all mankind into a sahahle state" — and p. 154, 
he observes, "One thing which the Saviour en- 
gaged in the covenant of redemption, was to make 
a propitiation for the sin of the whole world, so as 
to open a door of mercy for all." Here then are 
his views of the engagements of Christ ; he atoned 
for the sin of the whole worlds by which means all 
mankind are put into a sahahle state : and this we 
believe is a scriptural view of the subject. But, 
from this view of the covenant engagements of 
Christ, how can it be justly infered that all who 
were redeemed by him, will infallibly be saved, 
without infering the salvation of all mankind ?— 
Hence it was said that the inferential proof in fa- 
vour of the certain perseverance of all who were 
given to Christ in the covenant of redemption, is 
fallacious, and therefore cannot stand against the 
pointed testimony of scripture. 

But how can this scriptural view of the atone- 
ment of Christ, be reconciled with the doctrine of 
eternal and unconditional reprobation ? Why, says 
Mr. W. by denying that Christ had an " intention 
that all should become actually interested in" his 
merits, p. 97. This unfortunate answer was anti- 
cipated^ and answered in p. 223 of my letters. — • 



TOTAL AND FINAL APOSTACY. 179 

Now, if God designed to withhold all the benefits 
of Christ's death froin a definite number of the hu- 
man family, who were eternally excluded by a de- 
cree of prelerition, of what use could the atonement 
have been to them ? Moreover, here is a particular 
number eternally reprobated to eternal burning, 
•who are nevertheless, by the death of Christ, put 
into a sahable state ; that is, in a state in which 
they r/my be saved, notwithstanding the decree of 
reprobation had made their damnation certain, ages 
before they were born ! Christ never designed they 
should be actually interested in his merits, and yet 
they may be saved? Did ever such jarring senti- 
ments flow from any other fountain ? 

If the eternally reprobated are in a sahable state, 
inasmuch as, according to Mr. W. God never de- 
signed their salvation, then they may be saved con- 
trary to God's design, and without having an actual 
interest in the atonement of Christ. Is this thy 
consistency, thou vindicator of reformed doctrines! 
Here then is a whole world in a sahable state, and 
yet ^part of that whole world eternalli/ reprobated 
by an immutable decree ! A whole world atoned for, 
a part of whom never had any saving interest in 
the atonement ! May such absurd assertions, be hid 
from the sceptical world, lest they be confirmed in 
their unreasonable prejudices against the consist- 
ency of divine revelation. 

This unscriptural doctrine declares the Son of 
God to be a most notorious hypocrite ; for it repre- 
sents him as having made atonement, that is, answer- 
ing the demands of divine justice, for those who, 
according to another component part of Hopkinsi* 
anism, were eternally reprobated, and who, not- 
withstanding Jesus Christ died for them, he never 
designed, nor intended to save ; and for whom, 
therefore, salvation was never possible ; unless we 
absurdly suppose the eternal and unchangeable 



180 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

purpose of God should be defeated* — It also repre- 
sents him as holding out insincere offers of salva- 
tion to the unhappy reprobates, thereby deluding 
them into a belief of his intention and willingness 
to save them, although they were doomed to utter 
destruction by an irresistible decree. (See the re- 
marks on natural ability and moral inability.) 

But let us contrast this doctrine respecting Christ 
having made atonement for the whole world, with 
what Mr. W. has said respecting national election 
and national reprobation. In p. 87, he acknow- 
ledges that his doctrine of election implies " per- 
sonal reprobation;" and in p.p. 80, 81, he avers that 
*' the national election of the Jews lo their pecu- 
liar privileges, and the national reprobation of the 
gentiles, " did most intimately relate to the things 
of eternity, and to the salvation of souls from eter- 
nal death." Here then is the doctrine of 'wide 
reprobating wrath,' as the pious, learned, and in- 
genuous Mr. Fletcher has expressed it. I suppose 
it will not be difficult to understand now, what the 
Hopkinsians mean by unconditional reprobation. 
The whole gentile world were, for four thousand 
years, men, women and children, although in a 
salvable state in consequence of being comprehend- 
ed in the scheme of redemption, unconditionally 
reprobated to eternal burnings ! One would think 
that to mention such monstrous absurdities were 
quite sufficient to refute them, Melckisidec, Joby 
and all other virtuous heathens, eternally reproba- 
ted ! for what ? Why, for not being born among 
Jews I David may commit adultery and murder 
Uriah ; and Solomon may worship the gods of the 
heathens around about ; but as they were included 
in the visible church, God sees no sin in them ! 
But an Abimilech, let him possess ever so much 
* integrity of heart, and innocency of hands ;' and an 
Adrian^ whatever may be ihis royal virtues ; a So- 



TOTAL AND FINAL APOSTACY. 181 

crates, a Thales, however free from vice ; must be 
sent to eternal, burnings, because born heathens ; 
for which they were no more accountable, than 
they were for not " creating two moons ;" and yet, 
astonishing to relate, according to Mr. W.'s views 
of the atonement of Christ, all these reprobated 
myriads, were, notwithstanding their eternal and 
unconditional reprobation, in a salvable state, and 
consequently conditionally condemned for not ac- 
ceding to the terms of salvation, which, though 
never made for them, nor offered to them, were 
nevertheless provided for, and sincerely offered to 
them. Is such inconsistent jargon fit to be re- 
commended as an object of faith ? 

How. contrary is this doctrine, which sweeps so 
many nations and individuals with the besom of 
destruction, to the sentiments of St. Paul, Rom. ii. 
l4, 15. ' For when the gentiles'' (Mr. W.'s repro- 
bates) ' which have not the law, do by nature the 
things contained in the law« these having not the 
law, are a law unto themselves, which show the 
work of the law written in their hearts, their con- 
science also bearing witness, and their thoughts 
the meanwhile accusing, or else excusing one ano- 
ther.' This important passage of sacred scripture, 
cuts up by the roots that narrow contracted scheme 
which stamps the whole heathen world with the in- 
delible mark of reprobation ; and exhibits an im- 
partial God judging mankind according to the light 
of the dispensation under which they have been, by 
an inscrutible providence, placed ; and completely 
overthrows the inference which our antagonist has 
drawn from our doctrine of national election and 
reprobation, namely, that it necessarily involves 
eternal and individual election and reprobation. No 
such horrid consequences flow from our doctrine, 
God, for wise reasons, resolvable into a just and 
beneficent providence, saw fit to reprobate, except- 



182 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

ing the Jews, all the nations of the earth, from that 
sjpecial revelation of his will, whi.ch was given to 
the Jews ; but it does not follow from that circum- 
stance, that they were also reprobated to eternal 
burnings in the world to come. According to the 
sentiments of the apostle, in the above passage, 
those gentiles who have not the written law, are a 
law unto themselves ^' and that those which shew the 
zoork of the law written in their hearts ; that is, those 
who suffer themselves to be influenced by the dic- 
tates of their consciences, Which are more or less 
enlightened by that law of the Spirit, which under 
every dispens-ation, and among all nations, is more 
or less made know^n to men, shall be finally accept- 
ed through the mediation of Jesus Christ* It is 
true, their salvation is of grace — a gracious God 
condescending to save those, who conscientiously 
improve the talent committed to their trust. 

It is undeniably manifest, I think, that one or the 
other of these doctrinjes must be false ; either the 
doctrine of unconditional reprobation, or the doc- 
trine of universal atonement, which puts all man- 
kind into a sahahle state 5 for they appear totally 
incompatible with each other. But that Jesu^s 
Christ tasted death for every man, and that all men 
are in a salvable state, is most unequivocally re- 
vealed in the Holy Scriptures, and therefore it must 
be admitted as an incontestible truth ; consequent- 
ly the doctrine of a partial and resti-icted scheme of 
redemption, and of a definite unconditional elec- 
tion and reprobation, must be false ; and hence it 
follows by necessary consequence, that the doc- 
trine of the certain perseverance of a redeemed few 
who only were comprehended in the scheme of re- 
demption, derives no support from the. scriptural 
doctrine of the atonement. 

It seems expedient to rectify some mistakes 
which Mr. W. has made in respect to what I wrote 



TOTAL AND FINAL APOSTACY. 183 

on this subject. In p. 149, he says I " confounded 
the distinction between the covenant of redemption 
and the covenant of grace." This is a mistake. 
I said, indeed, that there is no such distinction as 
he has made ; that is, that Christ covenanted to re- 
deem only a parl^ while it is manifest that he died 
for allj and that, in (he covenant of grace, ofiers of 
salvation are actually made to all ; because, if 
only a part were redeemed, how could all have 
been saved ? My object in the letter was to prove 
that the work of redemption was accomplished by 
the death of Christ ; and as Mr. W. admitted the 
scriptural truth, that the merits of his death were 
commensm*atc to the wants of the whole huicari 
family, that therefore his distinction between re- 
demption and ihe. atonement was unscriptural. And 
as he has brought neither scripture nor argument 
to invalidate my direct scripture proof upon this 
subject, or the inferences drawn from that |)roof, 
I consider this part of the subject remains perma- 
nently established on the immovable rock of truth. 
That a distinction was admitted between the 
atonement^ and the covenant of grace, the reader 
will perceive by turning to pages 227, 228, 229. 
* Perhaps,' said 1, ' you will reply, that the atone- 
ment is distinct from the covenant of grace.' We 
grant there is a distinction. For the grand work 
of atonement was effected without any condition on 
our part. Christ by his sufferings and death ac- 
complished this work, and thereby opened a way 
by which sinners miglit come to God, and obtain 
life everlasting.' The same distinction is noted in 
the following passage : — ' In regard to the price of 
redemption, or work of atonement, I grant it did 
not deocnd on any conditions to be performed by 
men, because it was effected by Jesus Christ inde- 
dependently of all men; but that our present and 
eternal salvation^ is suspended on conditions to be 



184 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

performed by us, is abundantly manifest from nu- 
merous passages of scripture.' Now, if the shed- 
ding of Christ's blood was the very act, by which 
the covenant engagements of Christ were fulfilled, 
and as by this meritorious a(5t all were uncondition- 
ally redeemed from the proper penalty of the 
Adamic law, then, though Mr. W.'s distinction be- 
tween redemption and atonement^ is not visible, 
yet ours between* the atonement^ and its applica- 
tion in our salvation^ is very apparent ; there is a 
manifest difference between the work of redemption 
and the work of salvation : The former was accom- 
plished by Jesus Christ, by his sufferings and 
death : the latter is effected, indeed, by Christ, but 
on condition of repentance, faith, love, and obedi- 
ence. Now, as our present and eternal salvation 
is conditional^ the doctrine of an unconditional 2iX\di 
infallible perseverance is not inferable from the 
covenant of grace, any more tlian from the cove- 
nant of redemption ; and hence Mr. W.'s doctrine 
of the impossibility of final and total apostacy, re- 
ceives no support from either of these covenants. 

3. What then becomes of his arguments ? If his 
foundation be destroyed by scripture testimony and 
by his own concessions, then are all his arguments 
fallacious. He shall be allowed, however, to say 
all he can in support of his theory. Let us then, 
attend to his scripture quotations. The following 
texts he produces to prove that his perceptions of 
the covenant of redemption, limited in its provisions 
to the elect only, are scriptural : — ' Ask of me, and 
I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance.' 
Psalm ii. 8. ' The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit 
thou,' &c. 'The Lord hath sworn and will not re- 
pent, Thou art a Priest forever?' Psalm ex. 1. 4. 
' 1 will give thee for a covenant of the people.' Isa. 
xlix. 8. ' I have glorified thee on the earth : I have 
finished the work thou gavest me to do.' John xvii. 
4. Allowing these texts prove, (which, howeverj 



TOTAL AND FINAL APO STACY. 185 

admits of a serious doubt,) that there was a cove- 
nant existing in eternity between the Father and 
the Son, and which was accomplished by Christ 
during his incarnation, they by no means prove Mr. 
W.'s [)oint ; for Christ, wiio was given for a cove' 
nant for the people, was given as a sacrifice for the 
sin of the whoU world^ and when he said by anticpa- 
tion / have finished the work, &lc, as in that work He 
actually died upon the cross, by which he made 
atonement for all men, these texts are very far from 
establishing the Calvinistic doctrine of a limited, and 
partial scheme of redemption. The same obser- 
vations will apply to his lengthy quotation from the 
Ixxxixth Psalm. From his manner of introducing 
these texts, his readers might infer that we did not 
believe Jesus Christ was constituted a Priest over 
the house of God ; but we wish our readers to un- 
derstand, that this inestimable truth forms a very 
important and interesting part of our creed. Yes ; 
we exult in believing that Jesus Christ is exalted at 
the right hand of God to give repentance unto Israel, 
and remission of sins. The word of promise is ful- 
filled, which said, Also, I will make him my first- 
horn, higher than the kings of the earth. But, while 
it is believed, that these texts of sacred scripture 
prove that Jesus Christ was constituted a Priest 
over the house of God, and declare, in unequivocal 
language, that he should be rewarded with a nu- 
merous seed of spiritual children, they do not af- 
ford the least support to the doctrine of our antago- 
nist, which restricts the covenant of redemption to 
an elect few. Jesus Christ, who was the subject 
matter of these prophetic declarations, poured out 
his soul a sacrifice for the sin of the whole zvorld, 
and thereby redeemed them fiom the penalty of 
the Adamic law, and placed them all in a salvable 
state ; and therefore all who were thus redeemed 
by hiiD, are not sure of eternal blessedness 5 and 

Q 2 



186 ON THE POSSIBILITY OP 

those who are finally condemned, will be condemn- 
ed only on account of their own personal transgres- 
sions. 

One grand objection to this doctrine is, that it to- 
tally overthrows the doctrine of salvation hy grace. 
The Caivinistic doctrine, which asserts that Jesus 
Christ has made perfect satisfaction to the justice of 
God in behalf of the elect, places their salvation on 
the principle oi justice and not upon grace : for, if 
the whole debt which the elect owed to God, was 
assumed by Jesus Christ, and by him discharged, 
then the justice of God can have no further demand 
upon thein» The law of God being completely sat- 
isfied by the obedience of Christ unto death, it can 
have no just demand upon those for whom satisfac- 
tion was made by Christ : and if the law has no 
demand, there can be no condemnation ; and if no 
condemnation, no necessity of repentance, conse- 
quently no need of forgiveness ; and therefore no 
room for the manifestation of grace in pardon and 
salvation : Thus does this fatal doctrine destroy at 
a stroke the whole gospel scheme of salvation by 
grace. If the penalty of the law be exacted, and 
answered, whether by proxy or otherwise, it is cer- 
tain justice can have no farther demand upon the de- 
linquent. If I owe a thousand dollars, which my 
friend pays for me, and it is accepted by my cred- 
itor, the bond is cancelled ; the law caa have no 
just demand upon me ; neither am I under any^ 
obligation to ask pardon for my failure. It would 
be the same, were 1 guilty of a criminal offence 
against the law of my country : — If that offence 
were unconditionally atoned for, neither the judica- 
tive, nor the executive authority can have any just 
demand upon me : I can demand an exemption 
from punishment on the principle of justice ; the 
law itself justifies me. In like manner, If Jesus 
Christ have, according to the Hopkinsian princi- 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACT. 187 

pie, unconditionally atoned for the sins of the whole 
world, both original and actual, then there can be 
no just demand against mankind now ; they are all 
set free, and that too, by the voice of law and jus- 
tice. Why should a man ask pardon for an of- 
fence which is already atoned for, and for which 
the law has received complete satisfaction ? This 
doctrine then represents the Almighty as demand- 
ing satisfaction twice for a breach of the law once^ 
first, by the death of Christ, which is supposed to 
have been commensurate to the whole demand of 
the law transgressed ; and then, secondly, of the 
sinner himself, who must either repent and obtain 
forgiveness, or otherwise suffer the penalty of that 
identical law, whose righteous demands have al- 
ready been completely satisfied by the obedience 
and death of Christ ! Where then is grace ? Nay, 
where is justice itself? For if Christ have satisfied 
the demands of the law, in its utmost extent, how can 
that same law have any demand upon man ? And 
if there be no law to condemn, what need of any 
grace to pardon? If the penalty of the law be an- 
swered, whether by Christ, or by the sinner him- 
self, then the sinner is either justified by law, or 
otherwise condemned unjustly. But the sacred 
scriptures uniformly declare that, Bi/ the deeds of 
the law, no flesh shall be justified in his sight. That 
theory, therefore, which supersedes the necessity 
of justification by grace, through faith in Christ, by 
placing his justification on the principle of justice, 
must be discarded as unscriptural and false. If 
the law has had all its demands answered by Christ, 
then it cannot justly demand any thing from man — 
and if the law have no demand, he cannot be justly 
condemned — if not justly condemned, there is no 
need of repentance and forgiveness ; for what need 
of being forgiven, when there is nothing to con- 
demn him ? But the scriptures positively declare 



188 Oi?? THE POSSIBILITY OF 

that sinners are in a state of condemnation, that re- 
pentance, faith, and forgiveness are indispensable 
to salvation : that theory therefore, which super- 
sedes the necessity of repentance and of forgive- 
ness, must be antiscriptural. The same infallible 
records testify that, By grace ye are saved through 
faith. But the scheme now opposed, supersedes 
the necessity of grace, to pardon the penitent sin- 
ner, by placing his justification on the ground of 
justice. Is not then that scheme unscriptural ? 

If it should be said, that, ' notwithstanding Jesus 
Christ satisfied the demands of divine justice, yet 
the salvation of the sinner is of grace,- because it 
was an act of grace in Christ thus to volunteer his 
services to rescue man' — It is answerd — This 
does not help the subject any. For the advocates 
of that system affirm, that the elect are given to 
Christ to reward him for his sufferings. According 
to this statement, therefore, God the Father paid 
Jesus Christ a stipulated sum in souls, for an equi- 
valent for his obedience unto death. If this be so, 
the sufferings and death of Christ no more origina- 
ted in grace, than pardon does, on the supposition 
that the demands of the law are answered. Ac- 
cording to the theory now opposed, the whole sys- 
tem of redemption was a legal transaction, in which 
Christ offered his blood as an equivalent for so many 
souls, which he thereby literally bought from divine 
justice ; and which are made over to him in this legal 
contract to requite him for his sufferings. By this 
means that lovely image of the divine Being which 
we have been led so much to admire, namely, his 
infinite love, is entirely effaced, and we are present- 
ed with a morose Being, whose inflexible demands 
were such upon mankind, that he would not relin- 
quish them without first receiving an equivalent : and 
Jesus Christ, our adored Saviour, is also stript of 
his gracious and benevolent character, and changed 



TOTAL AND FINAL APOSTACY. 180 

into a mercenary being who only came into the 
world to enhance his own interest by paying a 
price to his Father for the souls of an elect few. 
While I would bow to the corrections of men of su- 
perior discernment, it reaJly appears to me that this 
scheme totally annihilates the very idea of grace in 
either the work of redemption or salvation. If 
those who contend for this graceless theory say, 
that they do not understand the terms in which "they 
convey their meaning literally^ then it is granted 
they convey no meaning at all — They ought there- 
fore to explain themselves, and tell us what they do 
mean. If they design to interpret those scriptures 
which speak upon this subject metaphorically^ then 
they give up their doctrine, and grant ])ardon and 
salvation were not purchased — If they understand 
them literally then they completely destroy the doc- 
trine of salvation by grace. 

The above reasonings upon this subject, may be 
confirmed by some eminent theological writers. 

* The pardoning of sin is a gracious act of God, 
discharging the offender by the Gospel grant, from 
the obligation to punishment, upon consideration 
of the satisfaction made by Christ, accepted by the 
sinner, and pleaded with God.' 

* I call pardon a gracious act ; for, if it were not 
gracious or free, it were no pardon. Let those 
think of this, who say, we have perfectly obeyed 
the law in Christ, and are therefore righteous. If 
the proper debt, either of obedience or sufferings, 
be paid, either by ourselves or by another ; then, 
there is no place left for pardon ; for when the 
debt is paid we owe nothing except new obedi- 
ence ; and therefore can have nothing forgiven us ; 
for the creditor cannot refuse the proper debt, nor 
deny any acquittance upon receipt thereof.' This 
passage is borrowed from Mr, Baxter by Mr, Wes- 



190 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

ley, and incorporated into his works, vol. sxii. 
p. 171. 

That Christ did not make a penal satisfaction to 
divine justice, so as to lay the Almighty under an 
indispensable obligation .to absolve any criminal 
from guilt, was the opinion of some Calvinistic min- 
isters ; among whom we may reckon Dr. Andrew 
Fuller. ' Redemption by Jesus Christ was accom- 
plished, not by a satisfaction that should preclude 
the exercise of grace in forgiveness, but in which 
the displeasure of God against sin being manifest- 
ed, mercy to the sinner might be exercised without 
any su*spicion of his having relinquished his regards 
for righteousness.' 

After mentioning some who have considered the 
death of Christ as purchasing repentance and faith, 
as well as all other spiritual blessings, on behalf of 
the elect ; and upon this ground have maintained 
that God is bound in strict justice, in respect to Je- 
sus Christ, to confer grace and glory on all those 
for whom he died ; he observes, * The writer of 
these pages, acknowledges he could never perceive 
that any clear and determinate idea was conveyed 
by the term purchase in this connexion, nor does it 
appear to him to be a doctrine taught in the scrip- 
tures. The notion of grace being bestowed, on ac- 
count of value received, appears to him inconsis- 
tent with the freeness of grace itself, and with the 
perfection of the divine being, to whom nothing can 
be added or given which can lay him under obliga- 
tion.' He finally concludes, ' If we say, a way 
was opened hy the death of Christ for the free and 
consistent exercise of mercy in all the methods which 
sovereign wisdom saw fit to adopts perhaps we shall 
include every material idea vrhich the scripture 
gives us of that important event.,' p. 157. See Shin 
Qw Salvation, p.p. 171, 182. fiom whose book these 
quotations are borrowed. 



TOTAL AND FINAL APOSTACY. 191 

It is manifest that the views of these great and 
good men, on the subject of redemption and the dis- 
plays of grace in bestowing pardon, were, so far as 
they have expressed them in the above extracts, in 
perfect conformity to our system. As to Calvinis- 
tic writers, though they sometimes were carried 
along with the current of truth, when they lost sight 
of their peculiar sentiments, yet, we know, at other 
limes, they advocated doctrines in direct hostility 
to these doctrines of grace. 

The following appears to us the scriptural repre- 
sentation of this important subject. The Jirst 
Adam, standing as our federal head and re{)resen- 
tative, by violating the covenant of works under 
which he was placed, involved himself and all his 
posterity in ruin : the Lord Jesus, the second Adam^ 
by the wise and benevolent appointment of God, 
became the second head and representative of man- 
kind ; and by his meritorious sufferings and death, 
so satisfied the demands of the Adamic covenant, 
which ihe first Adam had violated, as to deliver all 
mankind from its proper penalty ^ so that none are 
now eternally condemned on account of Adam's 
sin. This first covenant knew no lenity or mercy ; 
and therefore it contained no provision for pardon- 
ing offenders. The law given to Adam, being im- 
mutable and invincible in its demands, could not, 
without prostrating the honour of the Law-giver, 
relinquish its requirements, without manifesting a 
suitable indignation against its violaters, by the re- 
quirement of an atonement : This atonement being 
made by the Lord Jesus, the second Adam, by suf- 
fering the proper penally of the first covenant, so 
far as repected the original transgression, mankind 
are rescued from that state of condemnation, (though 
not from its contamination,) in which the first Adam 
had involved them. In this new covenant of re- 
demption and grace, pardon is dispensed to the 



192 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

guilty on condition of repentance and faith. Under 
this gracious covenant we can say in truth, ' If any 
man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Je- 
sus Christ the righteous : And he is the propitia- 
tion for our sins ; and not for ours only, but also 
for the sins of the whole world.' 1 John ii. 1, 2. 

We have been conducted to this view of ithe 
subject, from the reasonings of the apostle Paul, in 
his epistle to the Romans, chap. v. 15 — 19. 'But 
not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if 
through the offence of one, many be dead, much 
more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which 
is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto 
many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is 
the gift ; for the judgment was by one to condem- 
nation : but the free gift is by many offences unto 
justification. For if by one man's offence, death 
reigned by one ; much more they which receive 
abundance of grace, and of the gift of righteous- 
ness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ : There- 
fore as by the offence of one, judgment came upon 
all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteous- 
ness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto 
justification of life. For as by one man's disobe- 
dience, many were made sinners •, so, by the obe- 
dience of one, shall many be made righteous.' 

In this important passage of sacred scripture, 
the apostle most evidently contrasts the two cove- 
nants, and the two illustrious personages, Adam and 
Christ, who stood as the representatives of each; 
and the respective results of their conduct. He 
teaches us, that in consequence of the one offence, 
(plainly referring to the original transgression) ma- 
ny (^roA^oi) that is, the multitude, the all of the hu- 
man family, were made, or constituted sinners, all 
were in a state of condemnation ; but that in conse- 
quence of the obedience of Christ unto death the 
grace of Gody and the gift by grace, which was by 



TOTAL AND FINAL APO STACY. 193 

Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many, (vaWovg) the 
multitude, the all of mankind. In this connexion 
the apostle affirms, that the unconditional benefits 
of Christ's death, are as extensive in respect to the 
removal of guilt, as was the destructive influence of 
Adam's sin in contracting guilt : and also exhibits 
the superlative excellence of the grand covenant of 
redemption, which was established by Christ, in 
which the pardon of many offences is dispensed to all 
penitent beliving sinners ; and likewise shows that 
salvation, according to the immutable terms of this 
covenant, is of grace, and not of justice. Indeed, we 
can have no consistent idea of pardon, only as an 
act of free grace ; {or justice respects the payment of 
debt, and not the dispensing of pardon. The origi- 
nal demand of the law, is, in this scheme of salva- 
tion, relinquished from the consideration of Christ's 
obedience unto death ; and a dispensation oi mercy 
is opened, in which pardon, salvation and holiness 
are bestowed upon those who comply with the 
terms of this new and everlaslinej covenant. 

How gloriously does the benevolent character and 
conduct of God blazon when viewed through the 
medium of this gracious covenant ! Exercising a 
sovereign and merciful government over the world, 
though inflexible justice might have demanded the 
punishment of the guilty violatcrs of his law. yet, 
in consideration of the satisfaction of Christ to the 
penalty of the Adamic covenant. He appears in the 
mild character of a gracious governor, dispensing 
pardons to all returning prodigals who willingly 
confess their rebellion, and beg for mercy at the foot 
of the cross. Let men adore, and saints rejoice ! 
while they contemplate this admirable scheme to 
rescue guilty sinners from the thraldom of their 
sins, and to restore them to the divine image. 

The atonement having been thus made by Jesus 
Christ, the terms of the covenant of redemption and 

R 



194 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

salvation, are now proposed to sinners, for their 
acceptance, or refusal ; and their salvation or dam- 
nation turns upon their accepting or refusing the 
terms of this covenant. That this is a just repre- 
sentation of the covenant under which mankind 
are now placed, will appear further evident by ap- 
pealing to those scriptures, where God is said to 
have entered into covenant with man. Thus we 
read, Gen. xv. 18. * The same day the Lord made 
a covenant with Abram, saying, unto thy seed will 
I give this land'- — ^^vhich covenant is more expli- 
citly related in chap. xvii. 1, &;c. * The Lord ap- 
peared unto Abram, and said unto him, 1 am the 
Almighty God : walk before me, and be thou per- 
fect. And J will make a covenant between me and 
thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.' Is there 
any reference in this transaction to an antecedent 
covenant having been made in eternity, to redeem 
one part of mankind to the exclusion of all the rest, 
as the foundation of this covenant, which God made 
with Abraham ? And how plainly are the conditions 
expressed — fValk before me, and be thou perfect, — 
Evert/ male child among you shall be circumcised^ 
and ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin^ 
and it shall be a token of the covenant between me 
and you, Yer. 10,11. Similar conditions are men- 
tioned in God's answer to the prayer of Solomon, 
1 Kings iii. 5 — 14. ' And if thou wilt walk in my 
ways, to keep my statutes, and my commcindments, 
as thy father David did walk, then I will lengthen 
thy days.' And did not the malediction of heaven 
come upon Solomon for departing from the statutes 
and commandments of God ? How awfully was the 
indignation of God manifested against Solomon, 
because he failed to fulfil the conditions of this 
covenant ! And what a striking proof this of the 
danger and possibility of apostacy. 

But the conditions of this covenant are mention- 



FINAL AND TOTAL APO STACY. 195 

cd in such numerous places, both in the Old, and 
New Testaments, that it would be superfluous to 
quote them ; and it is impossible foi" any man to 
read the bible attentively without perceiving them, 
either expressed or implied, in almost every page. 
Indeed this point is not denied by Mr. Williston. 
*• Living by faith," says he, '^ and a continuance in 
well-doing, are as necessary conditions of salvation, 
as believing, in the first instance, is a necessary 
condition." p. 155. But he supposes that "Con- 
ditions in a covenant do not always imply iinccr- 
tainty,'^'' p. 153. 

Jf the conditions of the covenant of grace do not 
imply any uncertainty, then are the elect, by virtue 
of the covenant of redemption, put quite beyond 
the saving influence of any condition Avhatcvcr, 
their salvation having been immutably secured long 
before they were born, and consequently entirely 
independent of any condition by them performed. 
Is not this imconditional election and reprobation ? 
What sort of conditions arc ihese, which were as 
immutably fixed as the throne of God itself? Can 
any man comprehend how the salvation of the elect- 
ed sinner is suspended upon such immutable con- 
ditions as these ? But we shall soon see that all 
Mr. W. has said respecting the conditions of the 
gospel covenant, is a mere fallacy, to which he has 
resorted to avoid the appearance of direct hostility 
to the sacred scriptures. In p. 151 he says, " Mr. 
B. represents me as saying, ' The covenant of grace 
is wMConditionaP — This is quite a mistake, which 
I shall shew in its proper place." This " proper 
place" is the place 1 have quoted, where he con- 
tends that the covenant of grace is conditional, — ' 
When 1 said that he represented the covenant of 
^race as unconditional, I did not mean to be un- 
derstood that he said so in words ; for 1 knew that 
he said it was conditional : but 1 meant that his doc- 



196 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

trine of redemption made the salvation of the elect 
?mconditional ; and I am of the same mind yet. 
In his sermons, p. 109, he says, " The Holy Spirit 
covenanted, wiLhout any conditions to be performed 
by men, to renew and sanctify the hearts of all 
those whom the Father gave to the Son." And 
again, " Christ did not engage conditionally^ to 
to keep believers from falling." And according to 
the doctrine held forth in his vindication, regene- 
ration is effected antecedent to any condition of re- 
pentance or faith. Here then, sinners are repre- 
sented, as being rejiewed and sanctified, regenera- 
ted and horn of the Spirit, and kept from falling, and 
©f course are secured in the everlasting covenant, 
entirely zvithont, and altogether before any condi- 
tions are performed— and yet their salvation is 
conditional ! Yes, reader, notwithstanding all this 
is done for them, namely, redeemed, renezoed, sancti- 
fied, regenerated, and boi'n of the Spirit, imcondi- 
iionally, yet their salvation, or election to eternal 
life, is dependent on conditions to be performed by 
them ! I must be excused for not discerning the 
harmony and consistency of these two propositions 
— for they appear as irreconcilable to my under- 
standing as the following — A benevolent friend 
gives me unconditionally a large estate, with an in- 
dispujLable title, diXiii ^wi% me mio actual possession^ 
with all the rights and privileges of a freeholder, 
Tvithout any conditions whatever, pledging himself 
absolutely and imconditionally to defend me against 
all intruders whatever ; but then I cannot have my 
title only on condition that I must become his willing 
vassal, bow the knee, and perform certain duties 
annually. I suppose a critic in law might be al- 
lowed to smile a little, without impeaching his 
piety, at such an unconditional-conditional-gratui- 
tous-sale of lands. And shall we smile, or weep 
over IVIi'. W's unconditional-conditional-covenant of. 



FINAL AND TOTAL AFO STACY. 197 

grace ? Its manifest absurdity will, I believe, render 
it unworthy of credit, without any further expo- 
sure, with all who value their rational powers. 

Now I ask every unprejudiced reader, if Mr. W's 
doctrine of redemption and salvation, does not 
place the present and eternal felicity of sinners be- 
yond the influence of any condition by them to be 
performed ? and yet, what is more astonishing still, 
notwithstanding all this is done unconditionally, so 
that every elect person is immutably sure of eter- 
nal felicity, he says, p. 154. " For we know it is a 
very possible thing, for man to break covenant 
with God." Here the whole doctrine for which we 
contend is conceded, namely, that it is possible for 
a believer to " break covenant with God," become 
an unbeliever, and totally apostatize ; for tlie con- 
troversy is only concerning the possihility of such 
an event. This consideration itself, of the mani- 
fest inconsistencies into which the defenders of that 
system are driven, is quite suflicient to induce a 
suspicion of its truth: Nay, it is one of the strong- 
est internal evidences of its untruth, that the sev- 
eral parts of it oppose and destroy each other. — 
The natural inference from this view of his argu- 
ments is, that the doctrine of infallible persever- 
ance does not flow from the nature of the cove- 
nant of grace, any more than from the covenant of 
redemption. 

4. Let us now see, if the possibility of total 
apostacy is not susceptible of direct proof from the 
explicit testimony of scripture. In attending to 
this point, time and room will not permit me to in- 
vestigate all Mr. W's explanations of those scrip- 
tures which were quoted in my letter to him upon 
this subject. Our readers must examine and com- 
pare for themselves, and decide according to the 
light of evidence. Leaving those scriptures to 
speak for themselves, and they speak no equivocal 

R 2 



198 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

language, it being past the art of sophistry to har- 
monize them with the doctrine of an infallible per- 
severance ; and also leaving the consideration of 
the mere possibility of tjie case, which is the point 
of controversy between us, I shall now take up the 
subject as a question oifact ; and attempt to prove, 
from scripture testimony, that some have totally 
apostatized from the favour of God, 

1. The first instance, as being the most promi- 
i\ent I shall produce, is Judas, Let not those read- 
ers, who have been accustomed to believe he was 
always a devil, be detered from an impartial exam- 
ination of his character, and of his end. The 
prophetic scriptures thus describe this unliappy 
man : — ' Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I 
trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up 
his heel against me,' Psal. xH. 9. It is universal- 
ly allowed, I believe, that this text is a prophetic 
description of Judas Iscarriot ; and, to put this mat- 
ter beyond doubt, the evangelist John, chap. xiii. 
18, has applied it to him, 'He that eateth bread 
^vith me, hath lifted up his heel against me.' Here 
Christ calls Judas his own familiar friend^ in whom 
he trusted. And can we seriously believe that 
Christ w^ould have taken a hypocrite^ a devil, into 
familiar friendship with him, associated him with 
his family, and have entrusted him with the sacred 
office of the ministry ? Such a supposition would 
impeach the adorable Saviour w^ith either ignorance 
or deceit. If he knew Judas to have been either a 
devil, or an hypocrite, then he must have deceiv- 
ed the people by sending such a vile man un- 
der the sacred character of an apostle, a messen- 
ger of heaven to proclaim salvation, to cast out 
devils, &c. If Judas were a devil, then Christ not 
only called a devil his familiar friend, but also 
confirmed the accusations of his enemies, who ac- 
cused him with casting out devils by Beelzebub th^ 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY. 199 

prince of devils. If Judas were an hypocrite, Christ 
either sanctified hypocrisy, by enobling it among 
the honourable means of extending the influence of 
his kingdom, or otherwise was himself deceived 
in the cnaracter and motives of Judas ? But neither 
of these defects can be attributed to Christ without 
scandalizing his immaculate character. 

Judas was associated with the twelve apostles 
when Jesus made the following promise to them — 
* Verily I say unto you, that ye which have follow- 
ed me in the regeneration, when the Son of Man 
shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit 
upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of 
Israel.' Math. xix. 28. In these words the Lord 
Jesus declares Judas to have been regenerated, (of 
course, according to the Hopkinsians themselves, 
he must have been an elect saint,)^nd made pro- 
mise to him (no doubt on condition of persever- 
ance) that he should sit on one of the twelve thrones, 
&c. That he was not always a devil is manifest 
from the words of St. John, chap. xiii. 27. ' And 
after the sop, Satan entered into him.' If Satan 
entered into Judas after the sop, he could not have 
been in him before. 

Moreover, the apostle Peter declares, that ' Judas 
fey transgression fell, that he might go to his own 
place,' Acts i. 25. Pray, Avhat did he fall from ? 
Why, from that ministry and apostleship which he 
had obtained, (ver. 17.) and from that regeneration, 
which Jesus Christ declared he was blessed wiih ; 
and he thereby forfeited his title to one of the 
twelve thrones, which had been conditionally pro- 
mised him by Christ himself. If he were always 
an avaricious, hypocritical, or devilish person, then, 
as he fell by transgression, and as people who fall 
m a moral sense, generally fall into the opposite 
from what they were, he must have fallen into a 
benevolent, sincere, and holy person ! So that after 



200 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

hisfall hy transgression he must have become a tol- 
erable good person. He might have become, at 
least, one of Mr. W's '• sophomores^ i. e. wise 
fools !" But to complete the sad catastrophe of his 
career in apostacy, and to finish the melancholy 
climax of his unhappy life, ' He departed and 
went and hanged himself.' Mat. xxvii. 5. Here 
then is the plain matter of fact, amply proved from 
the indubitable testimony of God's word, of the^- 
nal and total apostacy, not only of a professed disci- 
ple of Christ, but one who had been pronounced 
by his unerring Master, regenerated^ was ordained a 
minister by Christ himself, sent to preach his ever- 
lasting gospel, to cast out devils, and to heal the 
sick — one too, whom the Lord Jesus called his own 
familiar friend in whom he trusted, with whom he 
walked to the h%use of God and took sweet counsel ; 
and in whose honesty and integrity Jesus had such 
confidence that he was entrusted with the fund for the 
poor — he carried the bag. To say that Christ con- 
fered such honours upon one who was always, an 
hypocrite, a usurer, and a devil, is to stigmatize him 
in a more glaring manner, than it would any body 
of ministers now, to accuse them with employing a 
haughty, avaricious, unconverted man, to preach the 
gospel ; because, if Christ did so, he must have 
done it knowingly, and of choice ; whereas the best 
body of men are liable to imposition. Can any 
man seriously believe that Christ sent a hypocrite 
to preach sincerity, a covetous impenitent man to 
preach repentance and benevolence, and a devil 
to cast out devils I What a sanction w^ould such an 
example have given, to all future generations to ap- 
prove of ungodly ministers. 

2. The next example I shall adduce is Saul, 
king of Israel. After Samuel had anointed him, 
and given him directions concerning his future con- 
duct, he continued his solemn address to him thus — 



FINAL AND TOTAL APO STACY. 201 

' And the Spirit of the Lord will come upon thee, 
and thou shalt prophecy with them, and shalt be 
turned into another man. And let it be when these 
signs shall come upon thee, that thou do as occa- 
sion shall serve thee ; for God is with thee' — * And 
it was so, that when he had turned his back to go 
from Samuel, God gave him another heart ; and all 
these signs came to pass that day.' 1 Sam. x. 6, 7, 9. 
According to this divine testimony respecting king 
Saul, he was, hy the Spirit of the Lord, turned inio 
another mzi.n : God was with him, and ga\c him an- 
other HEART. 1 know not how words can more 
strongly express a real radical change of heart and 
of character. If all this can be done for a man, 
without regenerating his heart, and changing his 
character, then may a man have another heart, be 
turned into another m^u, by having the Spirit of thi 
Lord come upon him, and yet possess the same 
hear^, be the scwie man, and remain destitute of the 
Spirit of God ; which would be no less a contra- 
diction, than to affirm that an unconditional cove- 
nant contains many coyiditions. 

Let us now attend to the account of Saul's apos- 
tacy, ' And when Saul enquired of the Lord, the 
Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by 
Urim, nor by proi)hets.' And in answer to Sam- 
uel's reproving enquiries, Saul said, ' For the Phi- 
listines make war upon me, and God is departed 
from me, &:c. to which Samuel replies, ' Wherefore 
then dost thou ask of me, seeing the Lord is de- 
parted from thee, and is become thine enemy ?' — 
*• Because thou disobeyedst the voice of the Lord,' 
&c. 1 Sam. xxvii. 6, 15, 16, 18. From this narra- 
tion of facts, we learn that Saul had/r^f departed 
from God, by disobeying his voice ; and that God 
as 3. judicial punishment to Saul, had departed from 
him, leaving him, first to be infatuated, and second- 



ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

ly, delivering him into the hands of his enemies, 
the Philistines^ to be destroyed — And finally, to 
complete the picture of his ingratitude, disobedi- 
ence, and awful apostacy, Saul, forsaken of God, 
pursued by his politcal enemies, and no longer aided 
by his friends, became his own executioner — ' There- 
fore Saul took a sword, and fell upon it' — ' So Saul 
died' — 'And no murderer hath eternal life abid- 
ing in him.' By this example then, the fact of 
final and total apostacy is proved. 
!.' 3. The third example in proof of the fact is that 
of king Solomon. As none will dispute but that he 
had grace, was highly favoured and approved of 
God, at the time, and for some time after his elevation 
to the throne of Israel, it would be needless to spend 
time in its proof. At an advanced period of his life 
we thus read concerning him : — ' For Solomon went 
after Ashtoreth the goddess of the Zidonians, and af- 
ter Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites. And 
Solomon did evii. in the sight of the Lord' — ' And 
the Lord was angry with Solomon, because his 
HEART was ^wrnejyVo??? the Lord God of Israel, which 
had appeared unto him tv;ice, and commanded him 
concerning this thing, that he should not go after oth- 
er gods : but he kept not that which the Lord com- 
manded.' 1 Kings xi. 5, 9. 10. And respecting the- 
last public act of his life, we read, ' Solomon there- 
fore sought to kill Jereboam.' ver. 40. But Jere- 
boam was only an instrument of God's righteous 
vengeance, to rend asunder the kingdom of Israel 
on account of Solomon's wickedness. How much 
soever we may be inclined, from the consideration 
of Solomon's former wisdom and goodness to com- 
misserate his unhappy degradation, yet it will be 
extremly difficult to reconcile his shameful defec- 
tion from the law of his God, with a state of grace, 
and favour with God ; for his wickedness was of 
such notoriety, that the pen of inspiration has re- 



FINAL AND TOTAL APOSTACY. 203 

corded it, to the perpetual disgrace of that once fa- 
mous monarch. If then we leave Solomon where 
the Spirit of inspiration has left him, and we have 
no account of his repentance, we leave him an un- 
deniable example of a deep revolt from the most 
elevated station ; and a station rendered more re- 
splendant, by the wisdom and goodness, with which 
the royal personage was once adorned who filled it : 
consequently we have, in this instance another evi- 
dence of final and total apostacy. If any one can 
prove that Solomon afterwards repented, he will 
then have invalidated this evidence ; but, it is be- 
lieved, that no one is equal to this labour, 

4. A fourth evidence of the fact now contended 
for, is that of the Israelites in the wilderness. Of 
these it is said, * They did all eat of the same spiri- 
tual meat ; and did all drink of the same spritual 
driflk ; for they drank of that spiritual Rock which 
followed them ; and that Rock was Christ. But 
with many of them God was not well pleased ; 
for they were overthrown in the wilderness.' 1 Cor. 
X. 3, 4, 5. Can men eat that spiritual meat, and 
drink that spiritual drink which Christ gives, and 
yet not be regenerated? 'Now these things were 
our examples, that we should not lust after evil 
things as they also lusted.' ver. 6. The apostle 
certainly assum-es the fact of their actual apostacy 
as a data, from which he derives his argument to 
dissuade the Corinthian saints from partaking of 
those evils which would separate them from the fa- 
vour of God — otherwise his reasoning is divested 
of all it force. 

Those three and ticenty thousand^ whose bones 
were strewed in the wilderness, are a standing 
monument of God's impartial hatred to sin, and a 
lofty beacon for the warning of all future genera- 
tions of Christians, that they may not imitate those 
apostate Israelites, in their idolatry ^ their levity^ and 



204 ON THE POSSIBILITY OF 

their murmurings against God ; and also participate 
with them in their exemplary punishment. How else 
can these facts be owr examples? It is to the same 
melancholy /ffc^ that the apostle alludes in Heb. iv. 
11. from whence he brings his exhortation ; — ' Let 
us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any 
man fall after the same example of unbelief.^ In 
both epistles, the apostle was addressing himself to 
saints, or regenerated persons ; and to guard them 
from apostatizing, not merely from a " profession of 
godliness," but from the genuine faith of the gos- 
pel, the indefatigable apostle adduces this fact of 
the apostacy of the Israelites. Can we desire 
stronger testimony in favour of the possibility of 
total apostacy. Some did, (this is the apostle's ar- 
argument,) apostatize, and therefore others may ; 
' Let us then fear, lest a promise being left us of 
entering into his rest, any of you should seeift to 
come short of it.' chap. iv. 1. 

5. The Jlfth, and last example I shall adduce, is 
that recorded 1 Tim. i.l9, 20. respecting Hymeneus 
and Alexander. The apostle exhorted his son Tim- 
othy to ' hold faith and a good conscience ; which 
some having put away concerning faith, have made 
shipwreck ; of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, 
whom I have delivered unto satan.' It should be 
remarked that this faith and good conscience which 
were shipwrecked^ totally lost, by Hymeneus and 
Alexander, were the same which the apostle com- 
manded Timothy to hold fast. To say, therefore, 
that this faith and good conscience signified only a 
nominal "• profession of godliness," is to say that 
Timothy was exhorted to cleave to a mere external 
profession of religion, which would ultimately send 
his soul to hell ! Here then is a plain matter otfact 
"-^total dindfnal apostacy ; for a ship wrecked, is 
completely and irrecoverably lost. What more un- 
deniable evidence of the dangerous possibility of 



FINAL AND TOTAL APO STACY. 205 

entire apostacy from the genuine christian faith, 
could be adduced, it is difficult to conceive. 

I shall conclude by remarking, 1 . That if the in- 
spired penman had considered the salvation of the 
elect immutably secured by virtue of the covenant 
of redemption, is it at all likely they would have ad- 
duced so many examples of fatal apostacy ? Why 
did they not declare frankly that all true believers 
were beyond the reach of danger, instead of giving 
such solemn cautions as these — Let him that think- 
eth he standethy take heed lest he fall — Take heed lest 
there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in 
departing from the living God* Allowing the im- 
possibility of total apostacy, such serious warnings 
seem like giving a false alarm, by apprising man- 
kind of only an imaginary danger. 

2. " Both sides,'*" says Mr. TV. " of this question 
cannot be true, therefore the bible can say nothing 
only on one side of it.'' p. 139. In this sentiment 
1 heartily concur. And that the bible says much, 
very much in favour of the dangerous possibility of 
falling from grace, cannot, I think, be denied. Nay, 
it speaks in the most strong and direct language in 
favour of this point ; therefore it can say nothing 
against it ; and hence the other side of the question 
cannot be true. 

This work swells so much beyond my expec- 
tation when 1 commenced writing, that I cannot, 
without too much expense to the reader re-ex- 
amine those texts I formerly quoted, nor answer all 
Mr. W.'s observations. To supply, however, this 
defect in some measure, the reader is requested to 
consult with solemn prayer to God, and with care- 
ful attention to their respective contexts, the follow- 
ing texts of sacred scripture, and then determine 
for himself on which side of this question the bible 
is. — Ezek. xviii. 24. John xv. 1, 2, 3, 4. Rom. xi. 
17. 2 Pet. ii. 20, 21. Heb. vi. 3, 4, 5, 6, x. 26— 

s 



206 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

39. Consult also the following — Matt. v. iS. xiL 
45. XXIV. 10. — 45. Luke xxi. 34. John viii. 31,^ 
32. 1 Cor. ix. 27. 2 Cor. vi. 1. Gal. v. 4. Heb. 
iii. 4. 2 Pet. iii. 17. Rev. 3. II. Matt, xviii. 35. 
If any man can read the above texts, and espe- 
cially the first catalogue, with a simple desire to 
know the truth, and not perceive that the bible 
speaks directly and expressly in favour of the pos- 
sibility of falling T^wa/Zy and totally from grace, he 
may then close his bible, and finally and totally 
despair of having any satisfactory evidence from 
it, of any one truth whatever. May God deliver 
the writer and reader, from trusting to the broken 
reed of an infallible and certain perseverance, 
founded upon a covenant, not revealed in the word 
of God, but expressly contradicted by that word. 



CHAPTER V. 



On the doctrine of Evangelical Perfection* 

XT is with some reluctance that I enter upon 
this subject, not because I have doubts of the truth 
of our views of it, nor because I perceive any difii^ 
culty in meeting the arguments of my opponent ; 
but because I am under the necessily of detecting 
again his misstatements of our doctrine upon this 
subject. I have already been reduced to the disa- 
greeable necessity of calling the reader's attention 
to these defects in the conduct of Mr. W. in several 
instances ; but in none are they more apparent than 
in his fourth section, on the doctrine of perfection. 
The title itself, is calculated to make an erroneous 
impression. " A vindication of the doctrine of im' 
perfection,^"^ Does not this contain an indirect in- 
sinuation that we defend the doctrine of absolute 
perfection ^ A doctrine this, which we no more be- 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 207 

lieve than we do in universal decrees, or a ' death 
purgatory.' But I perceive his dilemma. It would 
have been too bare-faced, to have proclaimed him- 
self the advocate, and vindicator of ^'ri/zf/ imperfec- 
tion ; because this would, among all considerate 
men, have classed him with sinful advocates. His 
arguments, however, will speak for themselves. 

in my letter to him, on this subject, I informed 
him that he had misrepresented our doctrine upon 
this point, where he had said in his sermon, that 
we held, '' that saints in this life, are as sinless as 
they will be in heaven" — and also that the " argu- 
ment against the power of death to sanctify,'* 
which he said was to be found in our Discij)line, 
was not to be found there. See Letter iv. p. 153 
— 155. 

To prove that we did not hold to such a sinless 
perfection in this life, several passages were intro- 
duced from our Discipline, which 1 believe, were 
sufficiently apposite to support my point. Not- 
withstanding all this, Mr. W. reiterates hi? former 
unsupporlea assertion, by saying, " I still consid- 
er them as holding to a sinless perfection in this 
life," i. e. as sinless as they will be in heaven, p. 
115. And in the beojinnine; of his section he takes 
up no less than/oi^r pages to prove that we do hold 
that saints are as perfect in this life, as they will 
be in heaven. Here then is a question oi fact be- 
tween us : He affirms ; and we deni/ : We cannot 
both be right. And 1 think a man when stating his 
own sentiments, unless previously convicted of dis- 
honesty, or unless repelled by the searcher of 
hearts, may be allowed some credit for what he af- 
firms of them,— especially when he supports, as I 
■ have done, his affirmation by direct appeals to ap- 
proved publications. This I have done, to which 
the reader is referred. And there the question of 
fact at issue shall rest. To multiply proof, would 



208 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

be a needless waste of time, unless the demand 
were more imperious than the simple affirmation of 
a man, who has already, in a number of instances 
evinced a disposition to evade the force of an- 
other's arguments. This is the softest term which 
I know to represent the conduct of Mr. W. upon 
this occasion. The reader, I hope, will pardon the 
expression. To tell a man bluntly that he utters 
falsehood, would seem inconsistent with that spirit 
of gentleness, which ought ever to characterize a 
Christian polemic, unless imperious necessity call 
for such reproof. 

In respect to the " argument against the power 
of death to sanctify," which I advertised him was 
not in our Discipline, he observes, p. 104. "I 
haye just been looking over all which it contains 
on the subject of Christian perfection, and am led 
to think, that it must have been some other book 
in which 1 found the argument." This is quite in- 
genuous ! Almost an acknowledgment, that he nev- 
er found the argument alluded to any where, much 
less in the Discipline, What next ? Why, he 
** must have /found it in some other book." What 
other book does he mean ? Some other book of 
Discipline ? Nay, but we have no other in which 
that article is contained. Or does he mean some 
other of our approved books ? I believe we have 
no other which professedly treats that subject, ex- 
cept Mr, Fletcher's sixth volume of Checks ; and 
it seems our accuser, had that before him when he 
wrote; but he does not pretend to have found it 
there. Does he mean " some other book" pub- 
lished by some of our enemies who had as little re- 
gard to their own reputation as he ? Why did he 
not atone for his mistake by a frank acknowledg-* 
ment of his error, instead of resorting to this miser- 
able excuse ? 

Although his manner of stating our sentiments 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTIO". 209 

upon this subject, precludes the necessity and the 
propriety of refuting his erroneous statements by 
additional testimony, yet it seems expedient, for a 
clear understanding of the doctrine under consid- 
eration, to mention the reasons why our doctrine 
does not make saints as perfect in this life as they 
will be in heaven. 

In heaven it is undeniably manifest that the im- 
material spirit will be no longer retarded in iti cp- 
eiations by this sluggish body, nor impeded in its 
pure service of love, praise and adoration, by any 
of those infirmities which are inseparable from mor- 
tality. At the resurrection of the just and unjust, 
the bodies of the saints being raised to honour, 
clothed with immortality, and placed beyond the 
reach of corruption *, being also, reunited to the 
sanctified soul, they will be fully qualified to fulfil, 
in the utmost extent, all the requirements of that 
law given to Adam. But we suppose, that, in con- 
sequence of our apostacy, the fatal effects of which 
are more or less felt by the best of men while they 
live, no man, in the present life, perfectly fulfils 
the precepts of that law; for, if he did, he would 
no longer need the atoning merits of Christ ; and 
these el!ec-ts, which the scriptures teach us to call 
the infirmities of our natures, are, if viewed through 
that law, sins. We do not mean by these infirmi- 
ties, irregular desires, unholy passions, such as an- 
ger, pride, Szc, but those deviations from that per- 
fect rule given to Adam, which spring fi'om una- 
voidable ignorance, ei ror of judgment, incohercncy 
of thought, impropriety of behaviour towards our 
superiois, inferiors, or equals ;*which ignorance be- 
ing done away in heaven, the judgment accurate in 
all Uiings, the thoughts tlowing regular, and all our 
belvuur according to the n)ost perfect standard 
of . :opriety, we shall no longer transgress any law 

s 2 



210 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

whatever. * Then shall we know, even as we are 
known.' No longer beholding God through the 
imperfect raedium of our present disordered senses, 
nor, as now, * through a glass darkly,' our views 
of his ineffable majesty will be inconceivably per- 
spicuous, our knowledge perfect, and our love, 
obedience, praise and thanksgiving, commensurate 
to the fullest demands of the Adamic law. Hence, 
at the day of Judgment, Christ will ' give up his' 
mediatorial ' kingdom to the Father, and God shall 
be all in all.' Coming up to the perfect demands 
of the covenant of works, the saints in heaven, will 
no longer need the intercession of Christ, nor the 
merits of his death to atone for the ' sins of their 
holy things.' All those imperfections of their na- 
tures which are the necessary consequences of the 
first apostacy, and which are inseparable from 
their present mode of existence, will then have 
been done away ; but which now while in the 
flesh, need the atoning merits of Christ. Now, we 
say, that if it be proper to call these deviations 
from this covenant of works, sins, then it is proper 
to call all men, the best Christians not excepted, 
sinners while they live^ But the scriptures cer- 
tainly speak of a deliverance from all sin ; and 
therefore the scriptures cannot call such deviations 
sins. 

Adam having been created holy, his knowledge 
^nd judgment perfect, he was fully adequate to all 
the demands of that covenant of works under which 
he was placed ; but such are the sad effects of his 
original departure from the terms of that covenant, 
that none of his unfortunate offspring, in this life, 
will be raised to that state of sinless purity and per- 
fection, which he possessed, when he came perfect 
from the hands of his Maker. 

If we go upon the ground of moral obligation, 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 211 

Strictly and abstractly considered, we grant that 
all men are under obligation, by virtue of the rela- 
tion in which they representatively stood to God, to 
obey the precepts of that law ; and therefore, they 
are, in the eye of that law, not only sinners, h\ii if 
judged by its rejquirements, must be justly con- 
demned. And the only reason why we are not 
condemned is, because Jesus Christ hath redeem- 
ed, (or bought us off) from the curse of that law, 
having been made, so far as the proper penalty of 
that law extended, a curse for us : But if we are 
redeemed from the curse of that law, then we are 
not under it now, as the rule of our conduct, nor as 
the terms of our acceptance in the sight of God. 
In heaven, however, this law is fully obeyed in its 
utmost extent ; otherwise Christ must occupy the 
mediatorial throne forever. Now I think that the 
impartial reader will at once perceive that we do 
not believe that saints in this life are as perfect, or 
as sinless as they will be in heaven. We neither 
hold it in direct assertion, nor by just inference. 

The sacred scriptures are very express in pro- 
claiming it to be the unspeakable privilege of 
God's people to be delivered from all sin ; and yet 
they more than intimate our inability to comply 
wiih the requirements of the Adamic covenant ; 
therefore they cannot consider those deviations 
from that covenant which originate from unavoida- 
ble ignorance, and mistakes in judgment, sin ; not 
because they are not a departure from the original 
ground of moral obligation ; but because Christ 
hath unconditionally atoned for those sins by his 
obedience unto deaths even the death of the cross. 
Indeed, there is no point of christian doctrine more 
explicitly proved in the sacred scriptures, than this 
doctrine of the total destruction of sin, properly so 
called, from the human heart. And this proof was 



2l2t ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

adduced in my letter, to Mr. Williston, What has 
he done to invalidate the ample and direct testimo- 
ny which was presented in that letter ? Why, he 
has re-examined the texts which he had quoted in 
his sermon to support his doctrine of sinful imper- 
fection, and which were so explained in my letter 
as to make them harmonize with the purity all 
along inculcated in the sacred scriptures ; but he 
has not even attempted to reply to my direct scrip- 
ture proof; and all my arguments from p^ 197 to 
21 2j he has passed over in profound silence — and 
this he calls an answer to my objections to his doc- 
trine ! This is what he has done — he has misstated 
our doctrine, by saying that we hold that the 
" saints are as sinless in this life as they will be in 
heaven ;" and then exhausted his skill in flaying 
this phantom of his own imagination, and then — and 
what then ? Why he doubtless enjoys his imagina- 
ry triumph in company with his friends—for his 
re-examination amounts to about this—" I have 
considered Mr. Bangs' explanations and arguments, 
but think my own best, and therefore I beg leave 
to recommend them to the public." See p. 113 of 
his book. 

But if his scheme of interpretation be just, the 
infidel need not allow the bible so honourable a 
tide^ as a ' cunningly devised fable ;' for any set 
of rogues who should presume to palm a spurious 
production upon the public, would at least affect 
the semblance of harmony in its several parts : but 
if Mr. W.'s plea for "sinful imperfection" be 
founded in truth, the bible is full of irreconcileable 
contradictions. To prove this assertion, let us 
contrast those texts which he has quoted to prove 
the necessary continuance of sin in this life, with 
those which declare it to be the desirable privilege 
of God's people to be delivered from sin in this life. 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 



213 



I, ^11 Christians must 
live ill sin while they live, 

PROOF. 

* For there is not a just 
man upon earth that do- 
eth good and sinneth 
NOT.' Eccl. vii. 20. 

' If they sin against 
thee, (for there is no man 

that SINNETH NOT.') 1 

Kings viii. 46. 

' But I see another law 
in my members, warring 
against the law of my 
mind, and bringing me 
into CAPTIVITY to the 
LAW OF SIN, which is in 
my members.' Rom. vii. 
2,3. 



* Who can say, I have 
made my heart clean, I 
am PURE from my sin ?' 
Prov. XX. 9. 



' But how shall a man 
be JUST with God ?' 

' If we say we have bo 
SIN, we DECEIVE our- 
selves, and the truth is 
not in US.' 1 John i. 8. 

^ For in many tjiings] 



2. It is the' privilege of 
Christians to be delivered 
from sin in this life, 

PROOF. 

* He that committeth 
sin is of the devil ; for the 
devil SINNETH from the 
beginning.' 1 John iii. 8. 

' How shall we that are 
dead to sin, live any 
longer therein ?' Rom# 
vi. 2. 

' For the law of the 
spirit of life in Christ Je- 
sus hath made me free 
from the law of sin and 
death' — God sending his 
own Son in the likeness 
of sinful flesh, hath for 
sin, condemned sin in 
the flesh.' Rom. viii, 2, 
3. 

' Seeing ye have puri- 
fied your souls in obey- 
ing the truth, through the 
Spirit, unto unfeigned 
love of the brethren, see 
that ye love one another 
with a PURE HEART fer- 
vently.' 1 Pet. i. 22. 

' The JUST shall live 
by faith.' 

'If w^e say we have 
fellowship with him and 
walk in darkness, we 
LIE, and do not the truth.' 
1 John i. 6. 

* Whosoever is born of 



214 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 



we OFFEND alU' Jame 
ii. % 



God, doth not commit 
SIN ; for his seed reraain- 
eth in him ; and he cannot 
sin, because he is born of 
God.' 1 John iii. 9. 
Now from ihh first class of texts Mr, W. suppo- 
ses that all Christians must live in sin every mo- 
ment : and if his interpretation were orthodox, 
what becomes of the second class, to which nume- 
rous others might be added ? That they cannot re- 
fer us, by anticipation, to a future state, must be ful- 
ly evident to all who read them with attention. 
Have they then no meaning ? That Mr. W, could 
give them no consistent explanation in conformity 
to his doctrine, is manifest from his passing over 
in silence, all these, and many more which were 
quoted in my letter, and totally evading the irre- 
sistible conclusion which was drawn from them, 
with the exception of John iii. 9. and chap. i. 7. 
Tit. ii. 14. * Whosoever is born of God doth not 
commit sin ;' and in his comment upon John iii. 9. 
he has, as he did before in his sermon, conceded 
the point to us : " The apostle had," says he, p. 
113, " in the sixth verse spoken of the inconsisten- 
cy of pretending to have fellowship with the Holy 
One, and living in sin, which is the thing meant by 
walking in darkness. Xiiving in sin, in the language 
of the bible, is living a wicked life, instead of a 
godly life." See how the current of truth will car- 
ry a man along against the tide of error. " Living 
in sin, in the language of the bible, is living a wick- 
ed life !" Bui Mr. Williston says that all men, the 
most holy not excepted, live in sin every moment 
of their lives ; therefore, if living in sin is living a 
wicked life^ and if those who live a wicked life can- 
not have fellowship with God, as Mr. W. admits ; 
then, according to his doctrine, which asserts that 
^11 men live in sin or live wicked lii)es^ there are none 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 213 

who have fellowship with God : but, as it is admit- 
ted on all hands that Christians do have fellowship 
with God, it follows that they do not live in sin, ac- 
cording to the evangelical sense of that word. Mr. 
W. therefore, must either fly directly in the face of 
scripture facts, by denying that Christians have fel- 
lowship with God, or give up his doctrine of sinfid 
imperfection ; or otherwise recant his comment up- 
on 1 John iii. 9. He may choose which of these 
alternatives pleases him best. 

But allowing his principle, which asserts that all 
men must live in sin, how shall we harmonize these 
seemingly opposite scripture testimonies ? I see no 
possible way to do it. On that ground then, one or 
the other class must be false. But if the holy scrip- 
tures give a false testimony in one instance, they 
may in every other instance : and hence this part 
of Hopkinsianism destroys the sacred harmony, and 
of course, the divine authority of the inspired vo- 
lume, by setting its several parts at perpetual vari- 
ance. Is there not, however, a way to avoid these 
apparent contrarieties ? It is presumed there is. 
It is well known to all attentive readers of the bi- 
ble, that two classes of people are therein charac- 
terized, — the righteous and the wicked : and that the 
wicked are, according to the concurrent testimony 
of scripture, characterized by living msm, walking 
in darkness, as being in a state of condemnation, ana 
as being alienated in their minds hy xvicked works ; 
and that the righteous are said to ha\'e passed from 
death unto life, being justified, walking in the light, 
and as being reconciled to God, by being renewed 
in the spirit of their minds — and those who have 
arrived to a mature age in the christian life are said 
to he free from sin, to be holy in all manner of con* 
-versation. Now if we apply the first class of scrip» 
tures to those who are in a state of nature, unpurijfi^- 
ed hy the blood of Christ ; and the second class to 



216 



ON THE DOCTRINE OF 



those, who have not only been justified, but also 
sanctified by the blood of the everlasting covenant ; 
we shall behold a consistent, and harmonious op- 
position and union, in the divine testimony. — Other- 
wise there exists a discordant opposition which ren- 
ders them unworthy of credit. Let us then see if 
we cannot devise a plan of reconciliation. Take 
the following propositions and examine their proof. 



2. It is the privilege of 
Christians, according to 
the evangelical covenant, 
to be free from sin, 

PROOF. 

' Being made free 
from SIN, and become 
servants to God, &lc, 

' The law of the spirit 
of life in Christ Jesus 
hath made me free from 
SIN ! ' Shall we continue 
in SIN that grace may 
abound ? God forbid. 
He that committeth sin, 
is of the devil — ' He that 
is born of God doth not 
commit sin." 
When those sinners characterized by the first 
class of texts, are renewed in the spirit of their 
Tuinds, and are, on condition of walking in the light, 
sanctified by the blood of the everlasting covenant, 
they pass from nature to grace, and from the power 
and dominion of sin, to a state of holiness and pu- 
rity ; and then they are characterized by the second 
class of scriptures, having had their hearts purified 
by faith in Christ. This method of interpreting 
and applying the sacred testimony of the spirit pre- 
sents us with a harmonious view of those venerable 



1. All men, previous to 
justification are by nature 
and practice, sinners. 

PROOF. 

' All have sinned, and 
come short of the glory 
of God.' Rom. iii. 2, 3. 
' There is not a just man 
upon earth, that doeth 
good and sinneth not.' 

' If we say that we have 
NO sin, we deceive our- 
selves and the truth is not 
in us.' 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 



217 



records of our salvation. — Or, we may adopt the 
following plan of reconciliation 



1. If Christians be 
viewed in relation to the 
Adamic covenant^ which 
was a covenant of works^ 
they must be denominated 
*' sinfully imperfect.^^ 

PROOF. 

* By the deeds of the 
law, no flesh shall be jus- 
tified in his sight.' 

' There is no man that 
^iNNETH not.' 

' Lord I am vile ; what 
shall I answer.' 

* In many things we 
OJFEKD all.' 



2. But if Christians are 
viewed in relation to the 
dispensation of grace, un- 
der which the grand cove» 
nant of redemption has 
placed them, they have a 
sinless perfection. 

PROOF. 

* Blessed is the man to 
whom the Lord imputeth 
not sin' — ' Thine iniquity 
is taken away, and thy sin 
is purged"^ — ' If the Son 
make you free, ye shall 
be FREE indeed.' 

* How shall we that are 
dead to six, live any 
longer therein .^' 

* If we confess our sins 
— he cleanseth us from 
ALL unrighteousness.' 

' If any man saith, that 
he knoweth God, and 
keepeth not his com- 
mandments, he is a liar.' 
Here both of these propositions are supported by 
ample, and apposite testimony. Again, 

1. There are none but ~' 

Tjhat are liable to sin» 



PROOF. 

'If any man sin, we 
have an advocate with the 
Father, Jesus Christ the 
righteous.' 



2, There arc no Chris- 
iians under the necessity 
of sinning, 

PROOF. 

' The Lord is my keep- 
er' — He that keepeth Is- 
rael shall never slumber 
nor sleep'- 



* Repent, therefore, and * No good thing will he 



218 



GIS* THE DOCTRINE OF 



do your first works, or I 
will fight against you, 
with the sword of my 
mouth.' 

' David, Solomon, and 
Peter, after their conver- 
sion, sinned most grie- 
vously, which proves that 
the saints are liable to 
sin/ 



withhold fi'om them who 
walk uprightly — ' Sin 
shall not have dominion 
over you ; for ye are not 
under the law, but under 
grace.' 

' Enoch, Abraham, Da- 
niel, Job, Isaiah, Paul, 
John, &c. &c. all main- 
tained such a holy char- 
acter, that we have no 
account of their having 
sinned after their conver- 
sion ; which proves that 
God is able and willing 
to keep his people from 
sinning, if they are obe- 
dient to his will ; and al- 
so that none are under 
the necessity of sinning.' 
If the reader will pay particular attention to the 
doctrinal propositions which head each class of 
scripture proof, he will perceive them amply sup- 
ported by direct scripture testimony ; and likewise, 
that this method of applying the scriptures, com- 
pletely obviates the apparent contrariety, which is 
so manifestly exhibited on Mr. Ws mode of inter- 
pretation. Thus we have a delightful view ©f the 
sacred harmony of divine testimony, proving the 
various points of gospel doctrine. 

In my letter to Mr. W. I attempted to vindicate 
the character of the apostle Paul, from the charge 
of carnality, which the opposers of Christian per- 
fection enaeavour to fix upon him, by quotations 
from the seventh of Romans. I wish the reader to 
consult that letter for himself, and then judge how 
far Mr. W. has removed the arguments which are 
there tised to harmonize what is said in that chap- 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 219 

ter, with what is said in the eighth chapter. He 
has, however, attempted to defend his application 
of that chapter to St. Paul, in his justified state, 
and to all experimental Christians. Let us exam- 
ine some of his observations on that subject. In 
p. 107, he says, " Mr. B. knows it is our belief, 
that the dominion of sin is put down in the hearts of 
believers, and that all their sins are forgiven them 
for Christ's sake." I am extremely gratified to find 
our vindicator of the doctrine of sinfulness, has 
made this frank confession of his faith in the effi- 
cacy of the atoning merits of Christ. " The do- 
minion of sin is put down," is it ? By dominion we 
are to understand, something that tyranizcs^ or has 
an autJioratative influence over another, so that the 
subject of this influence is under some kind of ne- 
cessity, either with, or without his consent, to yield 
obedience. If therefore the dominion of sin is put 
down in the hearts of believers, they are no Ioniser 
under its influence or control. This then is Mr. 
W.'s belief in respect to the Christian's privilege. 
Now let us contrast this description of the Chris- 
tian's privilege, with what St. Paul says of himsell 
in the seventh of Romans ; and which the vindi- 
cator supposes is applicable to all saints. 

- - t p^^, what I do, I al- 

low not — but what I hate, 
that do 1.' ' Now then, 
it is no more I that do it, 
but sin that dwelleth in 
me.' Rom. vii, 15,17. - 
Here sin is represented 
as having the dominion,^ 
and as injiuenciiig t® that 
which the person would not. Is then sin put down, 
where it reigns with such control ? Therefore, ac- 
cording to Mr. W's own description of the Christian 
'.baracter; the person characterized in that chapter, 



" The dominion of sin 
is put down in the hearts 
of believers," Mr. W. p. 
1 07. Here sin is brought 
under ^ and the Christian 
is represented as having 
dominion over sin. 



220 



ON THE DOCTRINE OF 



was not an apostolic christian. Take another 
instance. 

" The dominion of sin ' But I see another law 
is put down in the hearts in my members, waring 
of believers." against the law of my 

Mr, Williston, mind, and bringing me 
into captivity to the law 
of sin in my members,' 
Iver. 23. 
Here then, the person described is completely under 
the dominion of sin, which was in his members, hav- 
ing such control over him, as to make him a caj)- 
tive to the law of sin: and yet, according to Mr. 
W. a believer has the dominion of sin put down, 
and he is under the dominion of grace. Now, if 
Mr. W. has honestly declared his faith in respect 
to the character of the believer ; and if that faith is 
correct, it is manifest that St. Paul was not de- 
scribing the character, nor asserting the privilege 
of an experimental believer, in the seventh of Ro- 
mans. And to shew the absolute absurdity of ap- 
plying what the apostle there says, to a Christian 
brought into the liberties of the gospel, permit me 
to present the reader with another contrast. 



' But when tiie com- 
mandment came, sin re- 
'vived, and 1 died."^ Rom. 
Vii. 9. 

Here sin is reviving^ 
its domineering influence 
exerts itself whenever the 
sinner is awakened from 
his spiritual stupor ; and 
the sinner is said to die ; 
all his false hopes forsake 
him, and he finds himself 
dead to God* 



Likewise reckon ye 
also yourselves to be dead 
indeed unto sin, but alive 
unto God, through Jesus 
Christ our Lord.' Rom. 
vi. 11. 

In these words the sin- 
ner is dead to sin, and 
alive to God. Can two 
totally different states, 
and different characters 
be more forcibly descri- 
bed and contrasted ? 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 



221 



' For sin, taking occa- 
sion by the command- 
ment, deceived me, and 
by it slew me.' ver. 1 1 . 



According to this dec- 
laration, sin is deceiving, 
and slaying the sinner, 
that is, tyranizing over 
him in such a cruel man- 



all power to stand against 
the terrible denunciations 
of God's righteous law. 



' But I am carnal, sold 
under sin,' ver. 14. Can 
the depravity of the hu- 
man hearty and the com- 
plete slavery oisin, be de- 
picted in deeper colours 
than the pencil of inspi- 
ration has done in the 
above words ? 



' Who hath delivered 
us from the power of 
darkness, and translated 
us into the kingdom of 
his dear Son.' Col.i. 13. 
How opposite this state 
from the former ! 

' Being then made free 
from sin, ye became the 
servants of righteous- 
ness.' ch. vi. 18. 

But accordins: to this 



ner as to deprive him of solemn declaration, the 



* I find then a law — that 
when I would do good, 
evil is present with me,' 

T 2 



Christian is free from the 
tyranizing influence of 
sin, and is now, through 
the liberating grace of 
God, able to stand in obe- 
dience to righteousness, 

' To be carnally mind- 
ed is death ; but to be 
s])iritually minded is life 
and peace.' ch. viii. 6. 

' If ye live after the 
flesh, ye shall die ; but if 
ye through the Spirit do 
mortify the deeds of the 
body, ye shall live.' ver. 
13. 

These words need no 
comment. The opposi- 
tion of sentiment between 
this and the other text, is 
as pointed as words can 
make it. 

' That the righteousness 
of the law might be fulfill- 
ed in us, who wall^ not 



222 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 



ver. 21 . * The good that 
I would, I do not ; but the 
evil which 1 would not, 
that I do.' ver. 1 9. 



after the flesh, but after 
the Spirit.' ver. 4. 'I 
can do all things through 
Christ, which strengthens 
me.' Phil. iv. 13. 

Can any man seriously believe that both these 
classes of scripture apply to the same person, in the 
same state of mind ? How diametrically opposite 
are they one to the other ! Now, we say, that on 
Mr. W's mode of interpretation they present a crude 
mass of contradictions ; and therefore would, if no 
other method of applying them were discovered, 
render the sacred scriptures themselves incredible. 

But, by allowing the first class to be expressive 
of a penitent sinner, groaning for deliverance in 
the name of Jesus Christ ; and the second class ex- 
pressive of one's having obtained that deliverance j 
you have an intelligible, harmonious, and con- 
sistent view of these otherwise contradictory scrip- 
tures. 

Take the apostle's metaphor, a man being in 
captivity, and you will see the expressive and for- 
cible manner, in which the heart of the sinner, 
groaning under the burden of sin, and earnestly 
looking for deliverance, is pourtrayed. A man in 
captivity having heard that his deliverance is not 
only possible, but probably nigh at hand, looks 
through the grates of his prison, with eager delight, 
while he groans under his present bondage and af- 
fliction. So the penitent sinner, to whom liberty 
has been proclaimed in the name of Christ, although 
he groans under the weight of his guilt and pollu- 
tion, looks forward ivith delight, and eagerly anti- 
cipates his deliverance. So says this penitent sin- 
ner, who is personated in the chapter we are con- 
sidering ; ' For I delight in the law of God, after 
the inward man.' Though now in bondage to the 
law of sin in his members^ he delights to view that 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 223 

law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus, which will 
eventually liberate him from his confinement. Nay, 
a criminal under condemnation, may delight in ac- 
knowledging the righteousness of the law which 
condemns him, although he knows he ought to suf- 
fer the just desert of his crimes, especially if that 
be intimately connected w^ith another law which 
proclaims his libert}^ 

Mr. W. thinks it incredible that a man in this 
state of mind, should take delight in the law of 
God after the inward man. But I believe it will 
not appear at all incredible to those who have had 
a genuine experience of salvation from sin, and 
whose judgment has not been warped from the 
truth by erroneous principles, that a penitent sin- 
ner, convinced of the justice of that law which 
condemns him, and anticipating his future deliver- 
ance by the law of the Spirit, should feel a delight 
in that gracious law by which he expects to be set 
free. If, indeed, we were to adopt Mr. W's no- 
tion, that the first work of grace on the sinner's 
heart is regeneration, we might then conceive it 
impossible for an unregenerate sinner to delight in 
viewing the law of God, or delight in anticipating 
his deliverance from the law of sin in his members ^ 
because a man totally blind, deaf and dumb, as he 
can have no sight of spiritual objects, he cannot 
-ee the purity and excellence of the gospel plan 
of salvation. And 1 have no doubt, that, accord- 
ing to his views of regeneration, the apostle in the 
seventh of Romans, is describing a regenerated 
man : but the manifest confusion introduced into 
the sacred writings by such a supposition, is no 
contemptible proof, not only against Mr. Williston's 
interpretation of that chapter, simply considered, 
but also against it in connexion with his percep- 
tions of regeneration : for if a regenerated man 
is one that is yet camalj sold under 5m, doing the 



224 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

ivil that he hates, and under captivity to the law of 
sin, where is the man that may not conclude himself 
regenerated ? Are not the judgments of all men 
convinced, especially in their sober moments, that 
living a sinful life is wrong in itself? And there- 
fore, those who suffer sin to domineer over them, 
give evidence that they allow their depraved incli- 
nation to gain the ascendency over their judgments, 
while they yield to those things which are mani~ 
festly unjust. The distinguishing characteristic of 
a christian is, that he is mdide free from sin^ it has 
not dominion over him, he is spiritually minded, and 
is under the influence of the spirit of grace. 

Our antagonist, instead of meeting those argu- 
ments which were considered of most importance 
to establish the truth for which we contend, fixes 
his attention upon some observations which have 
l)ut a remote bearing upon the main point at issue 
between us. Let us, however, attend to some of 
his remarks. " One of their most potent argu- 
ments is drawn from the characteristic names, by 
which the scriptures distinguish saints from sin- 
ners. They are frequently called perfect," p. 
115. Not so: Our most potent argument is 
grounded upon explicit scripture testimony, which 
declares that the hearts of sanctified Christians 
are purified by faith ; that they possess that * per- 
fect love which casteth out fear,' It is founded up- 
on the infinite merits of the Lord Jesus, who came 
to destroy the works of the devil, and the energies 
of the Eternal Spirit which works mightily in the 
hearts of them that believe. These are the data, 
or the ground of our argumentation ; and that the 
arguments derived from these sources are invul- 
nerable, even in the estimation of Mr. W. is evi- 
dent from his having passed the most of them over 
in perfect silence, it is true, in my letter to him 
upon this subject, I referred to those scriptures 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTieX. 225 

which denominate Christians perfect, to shew that 
we were fully justified in calling them perfect : 
(see p. 194) and we likewise refer to such scrip- 
tures to prove, that, unless the Holy Ghost has ap- 
plied unmeaning epithets to sanctified Christians, 
they must possess some kind of perfection : and, as 
all men must know that they are not perfectly im- 
mutable, nor perfect in judgment, or understanding, 
therefore the perfection to which they are to attain, 
must be what St. John calls '-perfect love,'^ 

Under this head, Mr. W. instead of meeting me 
upon this ground of argumentation which 1 occu- 
pied, has invented an argument of his own, and 
then concludes it easily refutable. No doubt he 
found it much easier to suggest his own objections, 
and confute ihem, than to look those in the face 
which his antagonist had stated, and which he 
found himself incompetent to encounter with suc- 
cess. After stating his imaginary argument, he 
says, "It ought to be carefully attended to; — 1 
think I have candidly examined the argument, and 
do not see any thing in it which militates against 
our doctrine." What candour! "What penetra- 
tion ! While writing professedly against a book 
containing avariety of scriptural arguments against 
his system of " sinful imperfection," he very de- 
liberately closes his eyes upon the greater part of 
them, creates one of his own, and then — and what 
then ? Why he has candidly weighed the argument 
— and very modestly thinks it does not militate 
against his doctrine ! As we are not concerned in 
the vindication of his objections against his own 
scheme, we shall take no notice of his very " can- 
did attention" to this wonder working argument, 
any farther than some of his observations have a, 
bearing upon the controversy between us. 

" The Methodists," says he, " distinguish Chris- 
tians on earth by the justified, and the sanctified. 



226 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

They consider all as justified, but only a part as 
sanctified. By the sanctified, they mean those who 
are wholly freed from sin. These they call per- 
fect. Now we can find no such distinction as this, 
between Christians on earth" — " there is no inti- 
mation that this difference exists between Chris- 
tians." p. 119. This is the burden of his argu- 
ment upon this head. He contends that, as all 
Christians are " sinfully imperfect," so all arc 
alike holy. But, if we mistake not, they are dis- 
tinguished in scripture, by bales, or little children, 
young men, dind fathers, ' I have written unto you 
FATHERS, because ye have known him that is from 
the beginning. I have written unto you youns 
men, because ye have overcome the wicked one# 
I have written unto you, little children because 
ye have known the father.' 1 John ii. 13. Is 
there not a very obvious distinction here ? The 
12th verse fixes the sense in which St. John used 
the epithet little children : ' I have written to you, 
little children because your sins are forgiven you 
for his name'^s sake. No one will dispute, I be- 
lieve, that, zyAe?i sins are forgiven a man is jusfifed ^ 
it is therefore the privilege of the weakest and 
youngest believer to have a witness of justification. 
But in the above passage, the apostle mentions 
young men, who have become strongs and who have 
overcome the zvicked one ^ and of fathers who had 
known Christ Jesus from the beginning of their 
spiritual pilgrimage. Now if these were consider- 
ed all belonging to one grade, why the above dis- 
tinction? Were not ihese fathers and young men in 
a higher state of perfection, than the little chil- 
dren ? Is it not respecting these that the apostle 
says, * Herein is our love made perfect, because as 
he is, so are we in this world — ' for perfect love, 
casteth out fear'—-' He that fearethj' is yet a babe^ 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 227 

' is not made perfect in love"^ — he is only justified, 
not yet sanctified. 

So St. Paul tells the Corinthians, 'And I breth- 
ren, could not speak unto you, as unto spiritual, 
but as unto carnal, (i. e. fleshly, denoting the fee- 
bleness of their faith, as the word carnal sometimes 
means weakness of mind) ' even as unto babes in 
Christ,' (those who, like St. John's little children, 
only have justification,) ' I have fed you with milk,' 
(with such spiritaul food as is suited to your childish, 
feeble state of mind) 'and not with meat,' (the strong 
meat of perfect love, or entire sanctification :) ' for 
hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now 
are ye able.' ' If I were to talk to you about the 
high attainments of perfect Christians, who are 
cleansed from all sin, the eminence of their spiritual 
attainments, would so far out-shine your's, that you 
would be discouraged. The glory encircling the 
heads of those fathers in Christ, who have come up 
to the exalted privileges of entire sanctification, 
•would cast such a shade upon you, my Corinthian 
brethren, as would entirely sink you into despond- 
ency.' Now, although he calls them babes in 
Christ, he shews them that they were not yet deliv- 
ered from the sins of their natures, by telling them 
that there were, * envying and strife, and divisions 
among them.' But our venerable apostle uses a 
very different language, when writing to the Phil- 
lippians. Respecting these he could say, that he 
' Thanked God upon every remembrance of them.' 
While he expressed his doubts and fears respect- 
ing the fallen Galatians, and wrote out of much 
sorrow and anguish of heart to the disputing Corin- 
thians, his heart overflowed with joy and gratitude 
on account of the prosperity of the PhilTippians, 
Having long witnessed their fidelity to God, amid 
the sufferings with which they were afilicted, he 
exuUingly said to them — * Being confident of this 



228 OF THE DOCTRINE OF 

very thing, that he which hath begun a good work 
in you, will perform it until the day of Jesus 
Christ.' But even these eminent saints he did not 
consider beyond the reach of danger, nor incapa- 
ble of growth in grace — ' And this I pray, that your 
love may abound yet more and more in knowledge, 
and in all judgment, that ye may approve things 
that are excellent; that ye may be sincere and 
without offence, till the day of Christ ; being filled 
with the fruits of righteousness, (not with indwelling 
5m, anger, pride, evil desire, &;c.) which are by 
Jesus Christ unto the glory and praise of God.' 
Chap. i. 9— 11. 

The same distinction is marked in Heb. chap. v. 
12 — 14. * For when for a time ye ought to be 
teachers, ye have need that one teach you again 
which are the first principles of the oracles of God ; 
and are become such as have need of milk, and 
not of strong meat : For every one that useth milk 
is unskilful in the word of righteousness ; for he is 
a BABE. But strong meat belongeth to them that 
are of full age.' That those babes in religious 
knowledge and experience, might arrive to full age, 
the apostle, in the next chapter thus exhorts them ; 
* Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrines 
of Christ, let us go on to perfection,^ The distinc- 
tion heiween justif cation and sanctif cation is mark- 
ed with great precision, in Acts xxvi. 18. 'That 
they might receive forgiveness of sins,' which is 
justification^ ' and inheritance among them that are 
sanctified by faith that is in me.' And this change 
from a less to a higher state of grace, is attested 
in 2 Cor. iii. 18. 'But we all with open face be- 
holding as in a glass, the glory of the Lord, are 
changed into the same image /rom glory to gloey, 
as by the Spirit of the Lord.' It is needless, I ap- 
prehend, to adduce more proof on this subject ; it 
being manifest lo all who read their bible with at- 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 229 

tention, that this distinction is clearly stated, and 
illustrated by the inspired writers. 

" The author of the letters seeks to support his 
doctrine by such passages, as 1 John i. 7. * And the 
blood of Jesus Christ, his Son cleanseth us from all 
sin :' and Tit. ii. 14. * Who gave himself for us, 
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and pu- 
rify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good 
works.' Now if these passages prove, that any 
are in this life cleansed from all sin, and redeemed 
from all iniquity, they will prove that it is the case 
with all the justified." p. 120. And suppose it 
would : must it follow that no7ie are cleansed from 
all sin? Admitting Mr. W.'s conclusion, it only 
proves that we are under a mistake in believing 
that there are some justljied persons not yet cleans- 
ed from all unrighteousness. And for my part, I 
would sooner believe myself under a mistake in this 
particular, than believe that the holi/ God has given 
a false testimony. But Mr. W.'s conclusion is 
manifestly erroneous. Those of whom St. John 
says, ' The blood of Christ cleanseth them from all 
sin,' are those who ' walk in the light as he is in the 
light,'^ before they are thus cleansed ; which plainly 
proves that it is a cleansing which takes place sub' 
sequent to justification. 

His mistake arises from confounding terms which 
are not used as synonymous in the holy scriptures ; 
I medin pardoji of sin, or justification, and cleansing 
from sin, or sanctification. Justification, in Chris- 
tian theology, signifies the acquitting a penitent 
sinner from the guilt of his actual sin, for the sake 
of Jesus Christ : The cleansing his heart, signifies 
his being purifed from the inward contamination of 
sin. One or two passages will satisfy the candid, 
that this is a scriptural distinction. I John i. 9. ' If 
we confess our (actual) sins, he is faithful and just 
to forgive us our (actual) sins, and to cleanse us 

u 



230 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

from all, (inward, original, or contracted) unright- 
eousness.' U the forgiving our sins, be the same as 
the cleansing us from all unrighteousness, the Holy 
Spirit has used a most senseless tautology — To for- 
give us our sins — and to forgive us all unrighteous- 
ness ! The same perspicuous distinction is visible 
in that striking passage in Isaiah, chap. vi. 7. 
^ Thine iniquity is taken away, (that is, forgiven) and 
thy sin is purged,^ that is, ihou art purified, or 
cleansed from thy heart sin. So the apostle Paul, 
SCor. vii. 1. * Having these promises, dearly be- 
loved, let us c/eflyi5e ourselves from all filthiness of 
the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear 
of God.' It will be admitted, 1 believe, that this 
was addressed to justified believers.; but it seems 
they still needed cleansing from all filthiness of the 
flesh and spirit. When a penitent sinner is justified 
by faith in Christ, his actual sins are forgiven him ; 
and when he is sanctified hy the blood of the everlast- 
ing covenant, the defilement of sin is taken away. 
This sentiment is expressed by the royal Psalmist ; 
' Hide thy face from my sins, and blot out all mine 
iniquities' — here is a prayer for justification — 
'Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a 
right spirit within me' — here is a j)rayer for entire 
sanc.ification, or the inward cleansing of the Holy 
Spirit. Psalm li. 9, 10. 

We know, indeed, that the word sanctify does not 
always apply to the inward cleansing of the heart. 
In its most ordinary signification it means to set 
apart to a particular use, whether sacred or pro- 
fane, but more generally for sacred uses. Thus 
the temple, the priests, the people of Israel, the 
holy land, and the Sabbath, are said to have been 
sanctified, that is, set apart for God's special ser- 
vice. But when the hearts of sinners are said to 
be cleansed, purified, or sanctified, it means that all 
the powers of soul and body are set apart from the 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 231 

f^ervice of sin, and consecrated to the special ser- 
vice of God — ' Know ye not that your body is the 
temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which 
ye have of God' — ' If any man defile the temple of 
God, him shall God destroy : for the temple of God 
is holy, which temple ye are.' 1 Cor. iii. 17, and 
vi. 19. ' God, says the Psalmist, hath set apart the 
godly for himself.' ' Being justified freely by his 
grace, and sanctified' by the efficacious blood of 
Christ, all their powers are consecrated to God, 
and He dwells in them by his Holy Spirit. 

Mr. Williston, in considering the argument drami 
from the command of God to his people to be holy, 
has a remark worthy of observation. " We will 
acknowledge," says he, " that this argument proves 
that sinful imperfection is wrong, and, on our part, 
inexcusable ; and that sinless perfection is our du- 
ty." p. 121. Is it not very extraordinary that a 
a man should proclaim himself the vindicator of a 
principle that is wrong! If " sinful imperfection" 
is wrong) as he says he will acknowledge it is, is 
he not the professed advocate "of a wrong, and of 
course, a sinful doctrine. To what incredible 
absurdities does error conduct a man I But this 
is not ail. Mr. W. lays it down as a funda- 
mental principle that God has decreed, and that 
his Almighty power is engaged to enforce this 
decree, that all Christians must be sinfully im- 
perfect while they live. If then " sinful imperfec- 
tion is wrong," God's decrees are wrong, and He, 
in enforcing those decrees is doing wrong, O error ! 
How long wilt thou persist in insulting Jehovah ? 
More yet : Notwithstanding God has decreed that 
all Christians shall be all their life " sinfully im- 
perfect," and has engaged Himself to see that de- 
cree executed, it is our duty to be sinlessly perfect! 
So says our vindicator of reformed doctrines. And 
in so saying, he fixes the indelible mark of absur- 



2^ ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

dity upon his system. Will he then, after affirming 
that God's decrees and acts are holy, declare in the 
face of the world that it is our duti/ to oppose these 
decrees. I am at a loss for language to express 
my astonishment that any man in his senses can ad- 
vance such incredible propositions. May I be al- 
lowed to express my full conviction, that it is im- 
possible for any man understandingly to believe 
such manifest absurdities. This consideration 
alone is amply sufficient to ruin the system we are 
opposing. Mr. W. from the consideration, that 
God's law is perfect, pure, just, holy and gooJ, (see 
Psalm xix. 7. 8, 9. and Rom. vii. 12) is constrain- 
ed to acknowledge, (to save himself from the 
charge of infidelity to which his absurd scheme 
manifestly tends,) that God has commanded us to 
be holy ; although by such acknowledgment, he 
declares that God's decrees for which he so zealous- 
ly contends in anodier place, are wrong. Reader ; 
the decrees of God are not wrong ; but the decrees 
of Hopkinsianism advocated by Mr. W. himself be- 
ing judge, are wrong, and sinful ; you are, there- 
fore, commanded to shun them. 

In p. 124 and 125 he blames me for intimating 
that his doctrine has an unholy origin and tenden- 
cy, by permitting people to foster the evils of their 
hearts. I acknowledge I charged his scheme with 
these defects ; and I see no cause from any thing 
he has said to alter my opinion. He, however, 
thinks his doctrine does not permit people to indulge 
themselves in sin. But I affirm that it not only per- 
mits them to sin, but it declares that God has de- 
creed, and does now effect that decree by his own 
operation, that Christians shall live in sin, that 
grace may abound ; that pride, anger, and hard- 
ness of heart, are now necessary to promote humi- 
lity, meekness, and gentleness. Now I ask, if these 
evils are essential to the promotion of christian vir- 



EVANGELICAL PERPECTIOrv, 23^ 

tues, IS it not right that they should indulge them- 
selves in them ? And if our advocate for " sinful 
imperfection," is also an advocate for his doc- 
trine of decrees, does he not plead for the exist- 
ence of sin in the hearts and lives of Christians ^ 
And if Christians are to regulate their lives accord- 
ing to the principles they believe, must not all Mr. 
W.'s admirers, make " sinful imperfection," the 
standard of their conduct ? Were they to do other- 
wise, would they not rise in opposition to what he 
calls God's decrees? To me, this consequence 
seems inevitable. Indeed, from an impartial sur- 
vey of his book, it really appears to me, that he has 
taken much more pains to plead for sin, has been. at 
more labour to prove that God has decreed it, that it 
is according to His will and agreeable to His mind, 
and is productive of great good, than he has to show 
the necessity and utility of holiness. ♦ 

On this subject Mr. VV. asks ; " Do the mem- 
bers of our Churches obtain the idea from their 
ministers, that it is matter of small consequence 
how they live?" p. 126. To this we answer, that 
they " obtain the idea from their minister" in Dur- 
ham, that God's eternal decrees secure sin in the 
hearts of all believers (and I suppose, probably un- 
believers too,) and that " pride, hardness of heart, 
self-seeking, and worldly-mindedness, impenitence 
and unbelief " are essential to their growth in 
grace; for he has said, p. 114. " One argument 
which seems calculated to establish the doctrine of 
sinful imperfection in this life, is the representation 
which the scriptures make of a growth in grace." 
It is true, they do not obtain the'idea that it is mat- 
ter of small consequence how they live ; because it 
is of the utmost imj.ortance for ihera to live in sin ; 
otherwise, according lo this " one argument" they 
could not grow in grace ; and, as a growth in grace 
is essential to their future felicity, and as the^r can- 

u 2 



234 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

not grow in grace, unless they live in sin, it is of 
unspeakable consequence that they are careful to 
live so as to be denominated sinfully imperfect. 

Nay, more ; according to Mr. W. sin, heart sin, is 
essentially necessary to make our devotional exer- 
cises acceptable — "No man, let him be who he will, 
can pray acceptably to the God of Israel, if he does 
not have a present sense of the sinfulness of his 
heart. He must be convinced not only that he had, 
but that he now has a sinful heart." p. 112. Of 
what sovereign use is sin. It not only contributes 
to the perfection and happiness of the universe, but 
gives wings to our prayers, and renders them ac- 
ceptable before the holi/ Throne of God* How 
different, however, were the sentiments of the royal 
psalmist of Israel. Although not a modern re- 
former, he may be allowed his testimony in sup- 
port of the " essential doctrines" of God our Sa- 
viour. If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord 
Villi NOT hear me. Psalm Ixvi. 18. Mr. W. says 
that they must " have sin dwelling in them'^'^ in order 
that their prayers might be accepted; but the Psalm- 
ist says. If / regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord 
Villi not hear me. What more a man can say in fa- 
vour of sin, I know not — than to say — God decreed 
and brings it to pass — it contributes to the. good of 
the universe — it is necessary to a growth in grace 
— to make us humble — and to render our prayers 
acceptable. Ought not Christians to be guarded 
against parting with an enemy who is so friendly, 
and who does them such essential service ? 

Suppose one of his disciples, who duly appreci- 
ates the conclusiveness of this " one argument" of 
his minister, were exhorted to get rid of his pride, 
&c. if he were consistent, would he not reply, ' It 
is my duty to grow in grace ; and as my minister 
has informed me, and quoted scripture to prove it 
tooj that if I were purified from these evils I could 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 235 

not grow in grace ; therefore it is of the first conse- 
quence for me to harbour pride, impenitence, &c. 
Would you have me turn perfectionist, and plead for 
purity of heart ? I have not so learned Christ. I 
have been taught, that sin is for my present and fu- 
ture happiness. And would you have me strive 
against that which is so essential to my happiness ? 
As the effect cannot be produced without the ex- 
istence and operation of the cause, and as growth 
in grace is the effect of living in sin, I think the 
more I indulge in sin, the more rapid my progress 
in holijiess. I confess, indeed, that my reason per- 
ceives the inconsistency of such doctrine ; but I 
have been taught by my minister, not to meet my 
antagonist in {he field of reason. And my minister, 
must, I think, be a wise man ; for if he did not gra- 
duate to the Senior class in college, he probably arri- 
ved to the Sophomores class ;* and he insists that, as 

* Tbis is an allusion to what Mr. W. has said. p. 1 1 8. " That 
the inspired writers have not been Jed to invent any means, 
which shall, at one view, exhibit both parts of their character, 
the renewed, and the unrenewed nature. The colleges have 
invented a compound name for one of their classes, calling them 
Sophomores, i. e. (being literally translated into English) wise 
fools'^'' — " But the scriptures have not furnished us with any 
such compound terms, to distinguish such as have some holiness 
mixed with some sin ; some wisdom with some folly ;" Is not 
this an implied acknowledgment that the inspired writers were 
strangers to his doctrine of sinful imperfection ? Or are we to 
suppose that the Holy Spirit himself was not sufficient master 
of language either to invent, or to compound some terms which 
might convey an appropriate idea of the Christian character? 
What a pity that the wisdom of the colleges of modern days, 
had not been known in the halcyon days of immediate inspira- 
tion, that some term might have been selected sufficiently ex- 
pressive of the Christian character ! But this subject is too sa- 
cred, and of too much importance to be decided by a mere al- 
lusion to a collegiate regulation. As the holy scriptures are 
strangers to any such compound terms to describe the Chris- 
tian, we may safely infer that their authors were totally ignorant 
oHvich wise fools as Mr. W. has described. Thej have said in 
express terms, free from all the ambiguity of scholastic refine- 
ments. Old things are passed away ; behold all things are be- 
come newy 2 Cor. v. 17. Whosoever commitM sin, is the servant 



236 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

to Christianity, we must all remain in this class, 
that is, be wise fools, as long as v/e live.' Thus 
does this absurd doctrine sanctify unholiness, and 
convert sin into an instrument of salvation. O how 
long shall men be blinded by such sophistry. Let 
it not be thought the effect of intemperate zeal 
against my antagonist, if 1 say it is a soul destroy- 
ing doctrine. The holy God hath said, The soul 
that sinneth, it shall die. He that committeth sin is 
of the devil. If ye die in your sins, ye cannot be 
saved. But this doctrine declares that all men, the 
best not excepted, with all the aid of the blood of 
Christ, and the energies of the eternal Spirit, enga- 
ged in their behalf, they must live in sin every mo- 
ment : If, therefore, any assume the license it gives 
them, by living in sin continually, as the word of 
the Eternal cannot fail, they must inevitably be 
damned ; therefore it is a destructive doctrine. 

Mr. W. says, p. 122. " Perhaps there is not one 
of my eight sermons on which his remarks are so 
severe in this respect, as the sermon on the sinful 
imperfection of good men in this life." This I 
grant is correct. And I feel myself highly honour- 
ed by this remark. Yes, I glory in being permit- 
ted through the superabundant grace of God, to be 

of sin, John viii. 34. They do not say, some of the old things are 
passed away, andwme things are become neio ; but a// things 
are become new. Neitfter do they say, he that committeth 
some sin is the servant of God, but he that committeth sin is of 
the devil ; and when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from 
RIGHTEOUSNESS — Kuoioing this, that our old man is crucified 
with him., that the body of sis might be destroyed, that henceforth 
we should not serve sin. Here is no intimation of a " mixed 
state of some sin and some holiness;" nor no compound terms 
descriptive of the ^^ renewed and unrenewed part^' existing in 
the same heart at the same time. And it is hoped, that no 
Christian will believe that more credit is due to a metaphorical 
allusion to a tschnical tc-rm of the colleges, than is due to the 
imposing evidence of divine revelation. How barren of evi- 
dence and argument must that cause be^ which forces its ad- 
vocates to such means for its support. 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 237 

associated in this respect with those who have borne 
such a pointed, explicit, and decided testimony 
against 5m, that cruel enemy to God and man. 
Read the holy scriptures — and see with what holy 
indignation the inspired men of Godj denounced sin. 
All the awful thunders of Sinai are made to roar in 
the ears of guilty transgressors. He that commit- 

TETH SIN HATH NOT SEEN HiM NOR KNOWN HIM. 

And is it a crime in me, to follow the current of 
eternal truth, in bearing a zealous and decided tes- 
timony against this common enemy of man's happi- 
ness ? In the fear and love of God, do I feel con- 
strained to warn Mr, Williston, and all others to be- 
ware how they preach and write in favour of sin, 
either in heart or life, either by referring it to God 
as its author, or by insinuating that it will have a 
beneficial influence upon man ; lest they be found (o 
fight against God, and to bless that which the Lord 
abhors. But 1 never meant to insinuate that all 
presbytcrian professors live in sin, or that there 
were not pious and holy Christians among them ; 
but this I maintain, without any fear of being suc- 
cessfully contradicted, that all who are holy, exhi- 
bit a practical refutation of their doctrine, and light 
against their own decrees. And it is well for man- 
kind, that immutable truth has so much influence 
upon the moral world, as to prevent the pernicious 
effects of speculative error : but holiness no more 
flows from that doctilne which makes God the au- 
thor of sin, and which says it is necesary to a 
growth in grace, than pure water does from a mud- 
dy fountain. 

Let us, however, examine this " one argument" 
which says, that living a sinful life is essential to a 
growth in grace. Are not sinfulness and holiness 
directly opposite, in their nature, tendency and ef- 
fects ? Was not sin, in the first instance, destruc- 
tive of holiness ? And must that which was once 
destructive of holiness, now be necessary to repro- 



238 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

duce it ? How absurd ! This argument was exposed 
in my letter to Mr. W. p. 200 — 204. 

He is no more^happy in his scripture proof. — 
The following he has quoted to prove that sinful- 
ness is essential to a growth in grace : ' He that 
bath clean hands shall wax stronger and stronger.' 
' The path of the just is as the shining light, which 
shineth more and more unto the perfect day.' What 
apposite proof! He that hath clean hands. Does 
this expi-ession, dean hands, respresent a filthy 
hearty stained with pride, anger, <Szc. ? The path 
of ih(i just shineth more and more. Is the just man 
one that seeketh unjust gain by holding of bribes ; 
or one that is continually under the power of un- 
just desires, so that when he " would do" honestly, 
this evil desire is present with him, and prevents 
him ? These texts prove his doctrine just as much 
as the following would prove that the earth is con- 
tinually scorched with drought, and overshadowed 
with thick clouds ; ' He maketh his sun to rise on 
the evil and good, and sendeth rain upon the just 
and unjust.' Why did not this strenuous advocate 
of sin, that filthy offspring of Satan, quote some 
text which said that sinfulness is necessary to a 
growth in grace ? The reason is very obvious. 
There is not a text in alt the bible which even inti- 
mates that any sin, any sinful temper, word or ac- 
tion, contributes either directly or indirectly, to 
our growth in grace. If there had been any such, 
I presume he would, instead of quoting those which 
prove directly against him, have produced them in 
vindication of this sinful doctrine, which seems so 
exceedingly dear to his heart. 

Another argument in favour of his doctrine, he 
tells us, " may be derived from the directions given 
to examine ourselves, to determine the truth of the 
work of grace in our hearts." p. 1 14. A man must 
be hard pressed indeed to resort to such arguments 



JEVAKGELICAL PERFECTION. 239 

as these. Let us try the strength of this. St. Paul 
says to the Corinthians, * Examine yourselves 
whether ye be in the faith.' According to Mr. W. 
(here can be no need of examining ourselves, un- 
less there be sin in our hearts. If, therefore, on 
examination we find we have sin, such as pride, au' 
ger, and selfishness, we must conclude we have the 
grace of humility, meeknesn, and disinterestedness ; 
for he infers that all who conclude themselves de- 
livered from those evils must be graceless. Sup- 
pose I were to say to my son, nine years old, — 
' Lemuel, are your hands clean P ' Yes, pa.' — 
How dp you know ? ** Because on examination I 
find many spots of dirt on them." Sit down, my 
son, you have proved that you have washed your 
hands thoroughly, and are every whit clean. Come 
William, let me examine you. Are your hands 
clean ? * Yes, Sir.' How know you that ? " Be- 
cause I can find no filth on them." Why, my son, 
you are certainly deceived. They cannot be clean ; 
neither is it true that you have washed them, unless 
there are mdiny filthy stains upon them. Go there- 
fore and w.ash until you can find these stains, and 
then you may conclude yourself every whit clean. 
Would my boys think 1 meant to ridicule them? 
or would they conclude 1 must be crazy ? 

Well, £ays Mr. W. to his congregation, Examine 
yourselves and determine whether you have grace 
or not. * I have, says one, and ifi the docirine 
drawn from your text is true, I think I must have 
much grace : for 1 find I have so much pride, anger, 
selfishness, blindness of mind, and hardness of heart, 
that I think myself the chief of sinners.' Aye, 
that's true, says Mr. W. You must be an elect- 
sinner — saint, or at any rate a " sophomore ;" for 
all the bible saints are such *' mixed characters," 
that they must, in order to grow in grace, have 
some sin, and " some holiness." You shall cer- 



240 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

tainly persevere. But, says another, ' I think I 
have grace ; for, on a careful examination of my 
heart, I find that load of condemnation for my ac- 
tual sins, under which I formerly groaned, is now 
removed ; and although, after I was awakened to a 
true sense of my miserable state by nature and 
practice, I saw myself the chief of sinners, yet I 
find a great change in my disposition, character, 
views of spiritual things, anc^ source of pleasure. 
Those destructive evils of my heart, pride, anger, 
selfishness, &c. which were formerly rankling with- 
in, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin 
in my members, are, through the agency of the 
Holy Spirit, eradicated; and I now find divine 
peace, love, joy in the Holy Ghost, meekness, gen- 
tleness, and humility. My soul is continually wa- 
tered from on high ; and I can praise my God from 
a delightful sense of his pardoning grace. Through 
the continual influence of the Holy Spirit, and the 
unceasing application of the merits of Christ, I 
have a victory over my besetting sins, and my 
heart burns with an ardent love to my adorable 
God, and to all mankind.' Ah! unhappy man, 
says Mr. W. you are deceived. You never knew 
the plague of your heart. The Methodists, those 
ministers of Satan, have deluded you. If you had 
grace, and if you were growing in grace, instead 
of feeling love, joy, humility, meekness, and pa- 
tience, you would feel hatred, sorrow, pride, anger, 
and fretfulness : for I lay it down as a certain in- 
dication of deception, if any of my wise fools ever 
profess to arrive to that state in which they think 
they have dominion over sin, and are made wise 
unto salvationc What admirable divinity this I 
How conformable to the holy scriptures ! 

But, '"' wherein does our doctrine favour sin ?* 

* Mr. W. in a note p. 125 has a remark upon Mr. Fletcher, 
ia which he thinks Mr. Fletcher misapprehended his antago- 



EVANGELICAL PERFECllOiN. 241 

Do we make void the law ? Do we say it is repeal- 
ed, or abated ?" p. 122. To this we answer, that 
the doctrine contained in the vindication favours 
sin in a variety of ways. 1. The section we are 
examining is a professed vindication of "sinfid im- 
perfection." 2. It declares that God has fore-or- 
dained, and brings to pass all (he sins in the uni- 
verse. 3. That all these sins are for the good of 
mankind. 4. Although it is wrong to live in sin, 
and although God has forbidden it under the sever- 
est penalties, yet he has decreed that all christians 

nists, because he represents them as pleading for sin in the 
heart. But, Mr. Fletcher was too g-ood a man xoHfuUy to mis- 
represent, and too acute iu his mental powers, and too well 
versed in the cont rovers}' in which he was engaged, i^nornntly 
to misnppreljend Mr. flill. It is undeniably evident, that if 
Mr. flill believed, as IVlr. Willislon does, that God has decreed 
sin, and that He brings to pass jnst so much as is pleasing to 
llim: that sin woriis for our good ; and that our prayers can- 
not be acceptable witljout it ; if he advocated his doctrine of 
decrees, as he undoubtedly did, and wished the prayers of God's 
people to be accepted, he must have plead for heart sin. 

1 wish all Calvinists might read that masterly performance of 
Mr. Fletcher. It has been pronounced bv one, who cannot be 
suspected of any partiality towards the Methodists, to be un- 
answerable. ' He certainly put to flight the antagonists, fqr 
which their survivors will never, 1 believe, cordially forgive 
bim. It is a fact, that a certain Calvinist, being asked' if he had 
read The Check?, replied, JV'a ; nor do 1 intend to read them ; 
for were I to do sn, I should turn Arminiany a thing 1 am deter- 
mined never to do while Hive,* Nightingale's Portraiture of 
Methodism, p. 464. 

How, indeed, any man of understanding can fead those 
Checks, without being convinced cf the errors of Calvinism, is 
no less inconceivable, than that Mr. W. should think he has 
invalidated any one of the aiilhors arerument!?, simply by saying 
that Mr. Fletcher misapprehended his antagonistic. The piet3', 
the wisdom, the deep penetration, and the strong and convin- 
cing arguments of the Rev. John Fletclier, will be admired as 
long as sound scriptural Christianity shall be believed ; and al- 
so remain a lasting monument of the pernicious errors of the in- 
consistent system he so conscientiously, and so successfully 
controverted. Were it not that Hopkinsianism differs in some 
of its branches from Calvinism, the works of thai great and 
gDod man, would entirely supersede the necessity of any such 
inferior performances, a8 the present publication. 

X 



242 ON THE DOCTIIINE OF 

shall live in sin, and shall continually break His 
commandments* 5. That living in sin is essential 
to a growth in grace, and an infallible mark of our 
having grace. I know not what more can be said 
in favour of sin. Suppose. I were to offer a plea in 
favour of holiness ; what more could I say to re- 
commend it, than to affirm, 1. That God has de- 
creed that man should be holy. 2. That he pro- 
duces holiness in the human heart. 3. That it is 
essential to happiness, 4. That God has com- 
manded man to be holy. It might, perhaps, abate 
ihe force of my plea, in some measure, were I to add^ 
God has decreed to counteract the influence of his 
holy law, by producing sin in the human heart ; 
and therefore, were I to add, that God's decree and 
command conjointly operate to the production of 
holiness, I know not what more could be said iii 
its recommendation. But Mr. W. affirms that all 
these (the commandments excepted) are engaged 
to keep sin in the human heart as long as we live, 
and therefore 1 think his doctrine favours sin. 

'• Do we make void the law ?" Yes, at a stroke. 
Irresistible decrees which operate universally, and 
are particularly engaged to prevent the Christian 
iVom keeping the law, render the whole law totally 
useless, it might as well be repealed at once, as 
to stand a useless monitor to those who cannot 
obey its mandate without rising in direct hostility 
to universal decrees. 

We shall soon see that such is the inconsistency 
of the scheme we are opposing, that, in order to 
defend it from the lacerating strokes of eternal 
truth, Mr. W. shuts heaven against every individ- 
ual of the human famjly, unless they go there con- 
trary to their desire. '' In heaven there will be the 
most perfect humility ; therefore proud spirits can- 
not desire such a heaven,^^ p. 224. But according 
to the section we are now considering, jonWe is one 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 243 

of the distinguishing characteristics of a Christian — 
Pridcj and many other radical evils, must remain 
in the heart after it I3 radically changed by the 
Spirit of holiness^ and accompany it through every 
stage of its spiritual progress; and yet a proud 
spirit cannot desire such a heaven. Does our vin- 
dicator mean to insinuate that a man can harbour 
pride, and not he proud 2 be selfsh, and yet be dis- 
interested/' he angry, and not indulge anger ? and 
earnestly desire heaven, while possessing a passioa 
which totally excludes the possibility of such a 
desire? What a jargon of contradictions, absurdi- 
ties, and incredible mysteries, are contained in the 
bowels of this crude system. Is it possible, with- 
out destroying its life, to purify it by the potions 
of truth, so as to present the beautiful and healthy 
countenance of Christianity ? If your patience, 
reader, is not exhausted, by having gazed so long 
at this offspring of inconsistency, lirst begotten in 
(he bed of heathenism, brought forth and named 
Christianity by Augustin, nursed in the church of 
Rome, and baptized " doctrines of grace'^"' by Cal- 
vin, weaned and fed by the synod of Dort, and 
whose features were horribly distorted by Hopkins, 
and exhibited to public view in this disfigured form 
by Mr. W. — I say, if you are not sickened at be- 
holding this ill-fated child of misfortune, you are 
requested to take another impartial survey of him. 
Here follow some of his features. 1. God is holy, 
A'indication p. 1 1 . 2. He decreed sin. 3. And brings 
it to pass by his own agency, p. 25, 30. 4. He has 
forbidden sin. p. 44. 5-. Notwithstanding, sin is 
lor the greatest good of the universe, p. 33. &• 
^vaints are holy. p. 118. 7. All the saints live in 
in. p. 120. 8. They are all carnal, proud, angi'yj 
^c. p. 109. 9. No proud man can desire heaven, 
p. 224. 10. All Christians, though proud, desire 
heaven for its own sake, ibid, 11. All men are 



244 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

bound to obey God's law. p. 121. 12. God has 
decreed no man shall obey it in this life. ibid. 13. 
All men have natural ability to love God with all 
the heart, p. 229. 14. No man can, for want of 
moral ability, love God with all the heart, because 
sin must dwell in some part of the heart at least, p.. 
232. 15. A man must be disinterested to enter 
heaven, p. 213. 16, The best of Christians are 
seljish while they live. p. 109. 17. God's revealed 
will is that man should be humble, &c. p. 121. 18. 
His secret will is that all Christians should be proud, 
p. 120. 19. God's revealed will is that ail repro- 
bates might be saved, p. 154. 20. His secret will 
is that all reprobates should be damned, p. 87« 
21. These reprobates were put into a salvable state. 
p. 59. 22. God never designed they should be 
saved, p, 97. 23. God, by an efficient operation 
upon the human heart, produces all sin, and all 
kinds of sin. p. 25. 24. Yet all these sins may be 
avoided, p. p. 59, 121. 25. All the actions of eve» 
ry individual are under the irresistible control of 
Almighty God. p. 30. 26. And yet man is a free, 
moral, and accountable agent, p. 20. This is the 
image of Hopkinsianism. Every feature is taken 
from Mr. Williston's book. Not that he has hewn 
out this unnatural figure himself. He has taken it 
as he found ii in the' rubbish, tie has only at- 
tempted to blow offsome of the Geneva dust, and 
to pare off some of the bluff excresences, and to 
draw an " eastern veil" over some of its offensive 
limbs. He is determined, however, to defend it 
against all assaults ; for he seems fully persuaded 
it has a divine origin. Jlowever mistaken he may 
be, we must give him credit for his sincerity in 
exerting his intellectual powers in pourlraying this^ 
ill-shapen image. Now I ask, is not law, gospel, 
truth, and consistency all sacrificed upon the altar 
of this divinity ? 



fc.VANG£LICAL PERFECTION. 245 

In p. 132 he has ihis sentence: "Now I think 
it cannot be, that the same religion, the self-same 
work of the Spirit, should produce such directly 
opposite effects in different hearts." It seems oui 
antagonist yields with great reluctance to the idea 
that there are any real Christians among the Me- 
thodists ; and yet he dreads uttering such an exclu- 
sive proscription as should class him among bigots ; 
and therefore he has so much Catholicism as to 
think there may be some Christians among us. 
We thank him for this apparent mercy^ because we 
consider it purely gratuitous ; for his narrow con- 
tracted system would lead him to exclude every 
man from any claim to the Christian character, 
who does not cordially embrace his doctrine of de- 
crees : and therefore we rejoice that he manifests 
so much Christian charity, as to evince a desire to 
extend his benevolence beyond the limits prescrib- 
ed him by his exclusive system. We feeJ, bow- 
ever, no anxiety in vindicating our claim to the 
Christian character. Our doctrines, thank God, 
are open to all, and our conduct is under the in- 
,spectIon of the public eye. And notwithstanding 
the prevalence of Hopkinsian doctrine, we trust 
divine love, in some measure, will counteract the 
influence of human decrees. No exclusive system 
of religion has yet gained the sanction of legisla- 
tive authority in this western world ; and, it is 
greatly hoped, notwithstanding all the exertions to 
the contrary, it never may. And as to Mr. W, 
he cannot, if he would, usurp the throne of God; 
and therefore his good or ill opinion will not be the 
rule of divine decision, either now or hereafter. 

We are, however, fully of his opinion, that the 
spirit of God, does not, nor cannot produce such 
opposite effects in different hearts ; any more than 
He can produce sin and holiness in the same heart. 
The holy Spirit must produce effects correspondent 

X 2 



246 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

to His own nature, which is holy ; and therefore* 
operating upon a believing heart, He effects a 
thorough cleansing from the tilthiness of sin, introdu- 
cing in its place gospel holiness : hence it is impos- 
sible for those who conscienciously follow the dic- 
tates of this Spirit, to live continually, as Mr. W. con- 
tends all Christians do, in sin. ' If ye live after the 
flesh, ye shall die ; but if ye, through the Spirit, do 
mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.' 

" is it not," says Mr. W. " because the Spirit of 
God does not dwell in them, that they are not made 
sensible of indwelling sin ? It is one part of the 
office of the Holy Spirit, to convince of sin," John 
xvi. 3. p. 136. How unwilling is our accuser to 
admit it possible for any of us to have God's Spirit/ 
Notwithstanding his professed Catholicism, and all 
his apparent candour, the bigoted sentiments of his 
heart, or the unhappy effects of his system, will ex- 
hibit themselves. It is well for us that we are ame- 
nable to a judge of more impartial character, even 
Him who has said, ' In every nation he that fearetli 
me, and worketh righteousness is accepted j' And 
from the partial decision of the pastor of the con- 
gregation of Durham, who professes so much perfect 
charity, we appeal to Him who will^Wge righteous 
judgment. I shall therefore refer our vindication 
from these degrading insinuations to that day, whea 
the secrets of all hearts shall be made manifest. 
I wish, however, to rescue a blessed portion of 
scripture from the improper use our vindicator has 
made of it, John xvi. 8. It is there asserted that it 
is the office of the Holy Spirit, not only to convince 
of sin, but also of righteousness and of judgments 
The same Spirit which convinces sinners of their 
sinfulness, also convinces them, when delivered 
from their sins, of righteousness ; for the ' Love of 
God it shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Ghost.' 
We may also remark the incorrect view in which 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 247 

Mr. W. has cxhibiled us to the public. Any one 
niight infer from reading his book^ that the Metho- 
dists never confess their native vileness, nor their 
actual sins. Such insinuations are so very errone- 
ous, that they do not deserve, nor shall they re- 
ceive, from me, any direct refutation. Were it ex- 
pedient, it would be an easy matter to present the 
reader with some of the most affecting acknowledg- 
ments of human depravity, as well as the guilt of 
actual sin, by Methodist converts. But as these 
are stubborn facts, supported by a host of living wit- 
nesses, and therefore stand as living monuments 
against Mr. W.'s candour as an author, I shall not 
waste my time to adduce their testimony. I believe 
he will one day have no little remorse, for having 
written so many unkind things respecting his neigh- 
bours. May God forgive him when he repents, and 
makes restitution. 

Mark the order of God in saving souls. He first, 
by various means, convinces them of sin. When 
thus convinced of the sinfulness of their hearts and 
lives, they see and feel the necessity of repentance 
tozvards God, and faith towards the Lord Jesus 
Christ, Exercising a godly sorrow for sin, and 
mourning on account of having abused the long 
forbearance of the God of love, and looking with a 
broken believing heart to the Lord Jesus, they are 
pardoned, and restored to divine favour. Walking 
in the light of God's countenance, they have fel- 
lowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus 
Christ his Son cleanseth them from all sin. Now 
while a sinner *is groaning under the painful exer- 
cise of repentance, he is not only sensible of his 
guilt on account of his actual sin, but he is also deep- 
ly sensible of the depravity of his heart. He knows 
from painful experience that his heart is desperately 
wicked, and deceitful above all things. Under this 
penerating sense of his guilt and vileness, he offersup 
strong cries and tears to him that is able and willing 



ON THE DOCTRINE OT 

to save him. But when delivered from his guilt, and 
washed in the blood of the Lamb, he is as sensible 
Cf«the change wrought in his heart, as he was before 
sensible of his guilt and depravity 5 and is now as 
ready to declare the loving kindness of his God in 
sending him deliverance, as he was before to con- 
fess his vileness, ingratitude and guilt. Will any 
experienced Christian affirm that because he was 
once guilty and polluted, he must remain so always ? 
Is not God able, and has he not declared his wil- 
lingness to 

* ChaDge this old rebellious heart 
* To conquer and renew ?' 

Has he not declared that he will be merciful to their 
unrighteousness^ and remember their sins and iniqui- 
ties no more. And when their sins are taken away, 
may they not declare it to the honour of the grace 
of Jesus Christ ? When their hearts are purijied, 
may they not modestly, for the honour of their great 
sanctifier, profess {hd^i purity of heart ? If they were 
to deny it, and from a voluntary humility, confess 
themselves still vile, guilty, and wretchedly sinful, 
would they not dishonour God by denying his gra- 
cious work? Is it not as ungrateful to deny what 
God has done for them in the great work of redemp- 
tion and salvation, as it would be to refuse him the 
honour of their creation and preservation ? 

When a man has been raised from a bed of lan- 
guishing toti state of health, must he, for fear of 
derogating from the honour of his kind and skilful 
physician, still confess himself sick, and say he is 
yet aiFected with a consuming disease ? May he 
not say with as much truth and propriety, now ' / 
am weZ/,' as he could before have said, ' / am sick 2"^ 
Would this frank confession convict him of deceit ? 
Or would any of his sensible neighbours say, * It 
cannot be. And to prove it, look at yonder man 
pining away with the consumption^ He is not welL 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 249 

And if you think yourself restored (o health, it must 
be because you were never sensible of your disease. 
This we infer froFn the fact, that your neighbour is 
-fill sick.' Would such reasoning be applauded as 
onclusive? I think not. What shall we say ? Be- 
ause Mr. Williston himself, still groans under the 
power of the carnal mind, does it certainly follow 
that every one else must also groan under it as long 
as they live ? Is it not possible that some of his neigh- 
bours, may have experienced the cleansing eificacy 
of Jesus' blood, so as to have been radically chan- 
ged, and delivered from their impurity ? And will 
he affirm that because they humbly profess their 
gracious deliverance, they are deceived, and are 
destitute of the spirit of God, Pie may do so, if he 
pleases. But it is doubted whether such conduct 
will add to his reputation as a man of understanding, 
or as a minister of the Lord Jesus, who came to 
destroy the -works of the devil, and to save his people 
from their siiis. 

The doctrine of Perfection should not be consid- 
ered as a mere point of speculation ; but it must, if 
we would be benefited by it, have an experimental 
influence upon our hearts, and a practical influence 
upon our lives. And let it be remembered, that the 
perfection for which we contend, is very far from 
that self-righteous spirit, which induces a man to 
pride himself in his own attainments, to boast of his 
own goodness : and from the loftiness of his own 
heart, to look down with sovereign contempt upoQ 
others — this spirit is a certain indication of an un- 
humbled heart : But the evangelical perfection in- 
sisted on in the holy scriptures, is always accompa- 
nied with a deep sense of our own littleness, un- 
worthiness, and undeservings. Humility, patience, 
and resignation to the divine dispensations, are the 
characteristics of a Christian whose heart is purified 
from the defilements of sin. W^hile he beholds the 



250 ON THE DOCTRINE OF 

ineffible glory of God shining in tjie face of Jesus 
Christ, he sinks into nothing in his own estimation, 
ascribino; all the 2;lory of his salvation to the Triune 
God. - 

Mr. Williston has made some extracts from the 
jom'nal of President Edwards, and others, in which 
they lament their sinfulness, and the remains of mor- 
al pollution in their hearts, in order to prove that all 
must continue under the power of sin every moment 
of their lives. But even allowing that these affecting 
acknowledgements were the genuine fruits of their 
Christian experience, and not the effects of those 
erroneous principles in which they were educated ; 
it by no means militates against the necessity and 
possibility of an entire deliverance from inward 
contamination. It is well known that those who 
are instructed in the Presbyterian school, are taught 
to believe that they must groan under those heart 
evils while they live ; and therefore, instead of look- 
ing for an entire deliverance from them, as they 
should, they are content to groan under them, not 
expecting deliverance until death. It is very sim- 
ilar with those who do not believe it their pi;ivi- 
lege to attain to a witness of justification in this life. 
If they act consistently with their unbelief, however 
sensible they may be of their guilt, they Avill not 
seek for, nor expect to find a pardon in this life : 
hence they go on in the darkness of sin and ^uilt 
continually. But must the inexperience of such 
persons be brought to confront the explicit testimo- 
ny of scripture, and the happy experience, of thou- 
sands, who can joyfully testify that the Son of Man 
hath power on earth to forgive sins ^ 

That after a sinner is justified freely by grace, he 
is made deeply sensible, and perhaps more so than 
ever, of the impurity of his nature, we freely admit : 
aot, indeed, because he is more impure, but because 
the light of God's Spirit shining into his soul, now 



EVANGELICAL PERFFXTION. 251 

more clearly discovers to him the native impurity 
of his heart : and this discovery of his impurity, of 
the roots of bitterness within, is an evident convic- 
tion of the necessity of that inward cleansing so es- 
sential to sanctify the heart ; that it may be a fit 
temple ^or the Holy Ghost. This humiliating view 
of the sinfulness of our natures, after being restored 
to divine favour, has caused some sincere Christians 
to doubt of their acceptance in the beloved ; and 
they have, for a time, cast away their confidence j 
not duly considering the obvious distinction between 
a sense of condemnation, which is the experience of 
a penitent sinner previous tojustification,anda sense 
of inward impurity, unattended with guih, which is 
the experience of all justified believers previous to 
their bein^ cleansed from all fdthincss of the flesh 

nd spirit. While the soul is exercised under this 
painful sense of original contamination, it may nev- 
ihelcss rejoice in the light of God's reconciled coun- 

onance, feeling conscious of his pardoning mercy ; 
but in order to retain the favour of God, the soul 
must, in the use of all the means of grace, earnestly 
seek after a total destruction of the man of sin, and 
to be filled with that perfect love, zchich casteth out 
fear. 

And to encourage them in this holy pursuit ihey 

liould recollect, that God has promised so to Cir^ 
cuincisc their heart s, that they rnny love the Lord their 
God with all their hearts. The sacred cliaracter of 
God — the holy conunandments — the nature of spir- 
itual happiness, and all the promises ot the gospel — - 
all conspire together, to invite the believer to a di- 
ligent seeking after the entire sanctification of his 

lature. It is necessary to fit us for the enjoyment 

•f a holy God in the kingdom of glory : It .is our 
daty^ because God has commanded us to be holy, 
because he is holy : It is our privilege, because he 
Uas promised, that if zuc xvalk in tfie light, as he 



252 ON THE DOCTRIXE OF 

is in the lights we shall have fellowship one with 
another^ and the blood of Jesus Chri t his Son shall 
eleanse us from all sin» All the gracious promise:^ 
of the gospel, indeed, are designed to excite in us 
a confident expectation, that if we improve the 
grace bestowed upon us with fidelity, that he will 
cut short his work in righteousness, and cleanse the 
thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of his holy 
Spirit. 

While, therefore, we admit, that all Christians, 
are deeply sensible of the infirmities of their nature, 
we rejoice in being authorized from every view of 
the economy of grace, to proclaim unto God's peo- 
ple the unspeakable privilege of a full conformity 
to the righteous &nd holy image of God. Is not the 
Lord Jesus as able now, since exalted at the right 
hand of the Majesty on high, to dethrone Satan from 
the human heart, and tox;ast out sin, as he was in 
the days of his flesh, to cast out devils, raise the 
dead, <Sz:c. If the impotence of these afflicted peo- 
ple did not hinder the operation of his power, and 
the demonstration of his goodness then, shall our 
native weakness, or inward pollution, prevent the 
exercise of his powerful loving kindness now, in 
cleansing our hearts from all unrighteousness ? 
Shall it be thought a thing incredible that our God- 
man, should raise spiritually dead souls to life, 
by breathing into them the quickening influence of 
liis holy Spirit ? Is the fatal leprosy so deeply root- 
ed in the heart, that it is beyond the power of Je- 
sus Christ to exterminate it ? Shall we, I^y our sys- 
tems, or our unbelief, limit the power and goodness 
of the Holy One of Israel ? 

And after having purified the heart from its mo- 
ral pollution, he is able and willing to keep such 
souls from falling into sin again. However inad- 
equate they may be in themselves, to withstand the 
numerous temptations to sin, yet if they watch and 



EVANGELICAL PERFECTION. 253 

pray, God has pledged himself to keep them every 
moment. ' He that kcepeth Israel never slumber- 
eth nor sleepeth.' No; not a hair of their head 
shall fall (o the ground without his notice. And the 
inspiring promise, ' I will never leave thee, nor for- 
sake thee' is the comfort and support of all God's 
faithful people. While, therefore, those who turn 
aside to vmaly^ can derive no comfort from the pro- 
mises which are made to persevering believers, the 
faithful believer himself may comfort himself at all 
times from the consideration of God's unchangeable 
goodness towards him. While he is found obedi- 
ent to the requirements of the Gospel, he may rest 
assured that God will keep him from falling ; and 
also cause every thing to work together for his good. 

Behold then, happy believer, your inestimable 
privilege. You are called to come up higher into the 
enjoyment of God. Be not satisfied with low at- 
tainments in religion. ' Rejoice in the Lord alway ; 
yea, again I say rejoice,' saith saint Paul to the 
Phillippians. Cast away your fears and doubts, 
and go forth into the land flowing with milk and ho- 
ney. See the majc^stic river of redeeming love, 
issuing from the throne of God and the Lamb, 
widening as it gently rolls along. — Its refreshing 
waters are sufficient to satisfy your most expanded 
desires. If your heart is right with God, you de- 
sire to be absorbed in divine love. Away, then, 
with all your excuses, your sins, your doubts; no 
longer let your heart be divided between God and 
the world. What are all- the pleasures that this tran- 
sitory world can afford you, when compared to 
those sublimer joys, those trar>sporting comforts 
which the sanctified soul enjoys in communion with 
God ! Let then, this be your object, to be lost and 
swallowed up, as it were, in the ocean of eternal 
love. 

Let for a moment, sects and parties stand aside. 

Y 



254 ON THE WITNESS AND 

Reach forth your soul to God. Behold the exalt- 
ed privilege to which Christianity invites you. It 
is a plentiful feast, where Jesus Christ himself at- 
tends to serve his disciples, with the reviving fruits 
of his heavenly kingdom. To induce you to come, 
he condescends to invite you himself, to draw you 
with the cords of his dying love-, to compel you with 
the persuasive eloquence, and divine harmony of 
gospel promises, commands, and exhortations. 
Will you deny yourself so rich a repast ? Keep 
nothing back, surrender up your whole soul and 
body to God, and he will take you into a sacred 
nearness to himself — He will ravish your soul with 
his joyful presence, guide you continually by his 
counsel, defend you by his power, supply all your 
wants by his unbounded goodness, snd finally take 
you to the lofty dome which Jesus has provided for 
his loving and obedient people. God grant that 
this may be the portion of the writer and all his 
readers. 



SB 



CHAPTER VI. 

On the witness and fruits of the Spirit, 

On this subjecti anticipated but little opposition; 
for though I was aware that Mr. W. had not insist- 
ed upon it, as he should have done in his sermon on 
the danger of being deceived in the all important 
work of salvation ; nor expressed himself with that 
precision w^hich became a minister of the Lord Je- 
sus in his sermon on regeneration ; yet I thought it 
such a prominent truth of the gospel, so perspicu- 
ously revealed in the sacred scriptures, and so fa- 
miliar to all experimental Christians, that he would 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 255 

not have had the boldness to deny its reality. In 
this, however, I have been disappointed. 

In my observations upon this subject, I said, that 
the Christian had a three-fold testimony, that he is 
a child of God. 1. 'The direct witness of the 
-Spirit, which bears witness with his spirit that he is 
a child of God. 2. Its indirect witness, which is its 
fruits. 3. His external deportment, called keeping 
the commandments of God, which perfectly corres- 
ponds to the internal dispositions of the heart.' 
'fo the two latter our antagonist does not object; 
but to the former he raises many objections. After 
writing near Jive pages in a fruitless search after 
what i mean by the direct witness of the Spirit, and 
concluding it a delusive, and of course a dangerous 
conceit, he finishes his perambulation with these 
words ; " Would to God that I might be enabled ef- 
fectually to exj)ose and drive it out of the world." 
p. 196. From his manner of expressing himself 
upon this subject, one might conclude that he de- 
signed as much as possible to darken counsel with, 
words without knowledge. It shall be my endeavour, 

1. To explain, as far as 1 am able, and defend 
this doctrine. 

2. To detect Mr. W.'s erroneous representations 
of our views concerning it. 

3. To confirm the doctrine by the testimony of 
Mr. W. himself and some Calvinistic authors. 

In p. 193 he asks, '' What then can be meant by 
this direct witness of the Spirit ? Does it mean rege- 
neration itself?" I answer no ; it no more means re- 
generation itself, than his book means Mr, Williston 
himself. His book is an evidence to all who read 
it, and believe in its genuineness, that such a book 
was written at such a time, by Mr. Seth Williston ; 
and that, from his own confession he was ignorant 
of the direct witness of the Holy Spirit. But this 
book is one thing, and the act of writing it another i 



256 ON THE WITNESS AND 

the one is the effect, and the other the cause, and 
therefore they were so dependent upon each other, 
that the one could not have existed without the ex- 
istence and actual operation of the other. Even 
so, the direct witness of the Spirit is not regenera- 
tion itself: although regeneration is eifected by the 
Spirit, aiid is an evidence that the Spirit has ef- 
fectually wrought in the heart of the regenerated 
man ; and so inseparably connected are ihey, and 
so dependent one upon the other, that regeneration 
cannot be produced without the existence and ope- 
ration of the Spirit : and whenever regeneration is 
effected by the Spirit, he leaves an inward impres- 
sion, or direct witness upon the heart of the believing 
sinner, that he is now justified ; and this is imme- 
diately followed by the fruits of the Spirit. The di- 
rect witness of the Spirit then, is the haiid writing 
of God upon the human soul, by which the sinner is 
assured that all his sins are forgiven him for Christ's 
sake — agreeably to the tenor of the new covenant, 
which God makes with his believing people ; — 
* This is the covenant that I will make with the 
house of Israel, after those days saith the Lord ; I 
■will put my laws into their mind, and write them in 
their hearts.^ When the laws of God are written in 
the heart by the finger of God himself, must not that 
person have a direct evidence, antecedent to all rea- 
soning that he is ' an heir of God and a joint heir 
with Jesus Christ.' ^ And 1 will be to them a God, 
and they shall be to me a people — And J will be 
merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and 
iniquities will I remember no more.' Heb. viii. 10. 
]2. The taking away our iniquities, and the evi- 
dence that they are taken away, although two dis- 
tinct things in their nature, yet it is supposed that 
they are simultaneous ; the moment our sins are ta- 
ken away, by the Holy Spirit applying the merits 
of Christ, He gives us an inzvard evidence that all our 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 257 

sins are removed ; and this evidence is what we mean 
by the direct witness of the Spirit. Being born of 
the Spirit, that same Spirit becomes our companion, 
guide, and comforter, directing us continually to 
Jesus Christ, the author and finisher of our faith ; 
and also bearing his sacred testimony to our hearts, 
that we are born of God. 

1 know not that I can more intelligibly express our 
sentiments upon this subject than Mr. Wesley has 
done in his admirable sermon on the Witness of the 
Spirit, ' By the testimony of the Spirit, says he, I 
mean an inward impression on the soul, whereby 
the Spirit of God, immediately and directly wit- 
Fiesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God, that 
Jcsiis Christ hath loved me, and given himself for 
me : that all my sins are blotted out, and I, even I, 
am reconciled to God' — 'Mean time let it be ob- 
served, I do not mean hereby that the Spirit of God 
testifies this by any outward voice : no, nor always 
by an inward voice, although he may do this some- 
times. Neither do I suppose that he always applies 
to the heart (though he often may) one or more 
texts of scripture. Bui he so works upon the soul 
by an immediate influence, and by a strong, though 
inexplicable operation, that the stormy wind, and 
troubled waves subside, and there is a sweet calm : 
the heart resting as in the arms of Jesus, and the 
sinner being clearly satisfied that God is reconciled, 
that all his iniquities are forgiven, and his sins co- 
vered.' Vol. ii. p. 366. 

That this is a scriptural, and one of the most 
important scriptural doctrines, is susceptible of the 
most substantial proof. It occurs not once or twice, 
Tiot obscurely, or incidentally, but frequently, clear- 
ly, and with studied design ; as if God himself were 
determined we should not mistake in a matter of 
such unspeakable importance to our present and 
future felicity. So it is said of Abel, the first mar- 

Y 2 



258 ON THE WITNESS AND 

tyr for righteousness, ' He obtained witness that 
he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts.'s- 
And of Enoch also, 'Before his translation he had 
this TESTI3I0NY that he pleased God.' Heb. xi. 4, 5. 
What other witness and testimony could these have 
been, than the direct witness of God^s Spirit from 
heaven, testifying to their spirits that their offerings 
and works of righteousness, were accepted, and 
pleasing to God ? Unless the testimonies here men- 
tioned were given by an audible voice, which is 
not likely, they must have been the inward sugges- 
tions of the eternal Spirit, zoitnessing to them that 
their faith was genuine, their works good, and their 
conduct righteous before God. Job likewise, al- 
though the waves of affliction beat upon him one 
after another, threatening to overwhelm him in des- 
pair, yet he comforted himself from an inward con- 
sciousness of the divine approbation; 'Al_so now 
behold my witness is in heaven, and my record 
on high.' Chap. xvi. 19. It was doubtless this 
witness which enabled him so confidently to express 
himself in Chap. xix. 25. ' For I know that my 
Redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand in the lat- 
ter day on the earth.' This spirit is promised to all 
that turn unto the Lord ; ' Turn ye at my reproof: 
behold I will pour out my spirit unto you.' Prov. 
i. 23. But it would be superfluous to quote the nu- 
merous passages in which this inward and direct 
^witness of the spirit is declared to have been the 
privilege of God's people, even under the darker 
dispensation of Moses: but we must not pass over 
the evidence derivable from the New Testament, 
which unfolds the more exalted privilege of all true 
believers, on every age of the world. * He that 
believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of 
his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But 
this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe 
^n him should receive j for the Holy Ghost was not 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 259 

yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified.') 
John vii. 38, 39. To his trembling audience on the 
da}' of penteco.st, Peter said, 'Repent, and be bap- 
tized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ 
for the remissioii of sins, and ye shall receive the 
gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is unto 
you, and to your children, and to all that are afar 
off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.' 
Acts ii. 38, 39. This grand promise of the Holy 
Ghost, of which the apostles speaks, and which had 
been so recently fulfilled in the hearts of the disci- 
ples, was that which Jesus, previous to his crucifix- 
ion, had made to his followers ; and stands record- 
ed John xvi. 7 — 15 'For if 1 go not away the 
Comforter will not come unto you ; but if 1 depart 
I will send him unto you' — 'When he, the spirit of 
truth is come, he will guide you into all truth,' <Sz;c. 
At the time the apostle Peter addressed the assem- 
bled multitude, Jesus ivas glorified, the promise of 
Jesus was now accomplished, which accomplish- 
ment was an internal and direct evidence to all who 
received it, that Jesus Christ now lived, and reign- 
ed at the right hand of the Majesty on high : of this 
they were now assured, because the Spirit, accord- 
ing to the promise, John, xvi. 14, \5, had now ta- 
ken of the things of Jesus, and had givettthern wilo 
his disciples. And this identical promise the apos- 
tle Peter told them, was made unto them who were 
then listening to the tidings of salvation — and to 
their children — the next generation — and to all that 
are afar off — the whole gentile world, including all 
in ever^/ nation — even as many as the Lord our God 
shall call by the gospel in all succeeding ages and 
generations, even unto the end of the world. It is 
Xhh promise of the Holy Spirit, which every believ- 
er in Christ enjoys, which is the direct evidence of 
his sonship. 
That this is an accurate interpretation of this 



260 ON THE WITNESS AND 

subject, will appear further evident from other pas^ 
sages of sacred scripture. Thus said Paul to some 
of John's disciples, ' Have ye received the Holy 
Ghost since ye believed?' — ' And when he had laid 
his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came upon 
them, and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.' 
Acts xix. 2- — 6. ' But if the Spirit of him that 
raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, he 
that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also 
quicken your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that 
DWELLETH in you.' Rom. viii. The reader is re- 
quested to consult this chapter with particular at- 
tention, especially from ver. 1 to 16, where he will 
see with w^hat vehemence the apostle insisted upon 
this, direct zoitness of the Spirit. Mark the follow- 
ing emphatical words ; ' For as many as are led 
by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. 
For ye have not received the spirit of bondage 
again to fear ; but ye have received the Spirit of 
adoption, whereby we cry Abba, Father. The 
Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirits that 
we ARE the children of God.' These words need 
no comment. They speak plain and distinct 5 and 
express a sentiment familiar to every child of God. 
All such know, from joyful experience, what it is 
to have the Spirit of God dwell in them, to bear 
witness to their adoption into the family of Jesus, 
and by which they are enabled to cry Abba., Father, 
The same inestimable truth is expressed in Gal. iv. 
4 — 6. ' But when the fulness of time was come, 
God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made 
under the law, to redeem them that were under the 
law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. 
And (note what follows) because ye are sons, 
God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son, into your 
hearts, crying Abba, Father.' How forcible this 
language ! And how directly in point ! Can any 
experimental Christian fail to understand what is 



FRUITS OF *rHE SPIRIT. 261 

meant by this spirit of adoption ? Who will affirm 
that this doctrine was coined by the Methodists? 
Is it not expressed in the above texts, in the most 
plain, explicit, and formal manner, by an inspired 
apostle ? And yet Mr. W. knows not what it means ! 
Ignorance of 5jDin7ifa/ things is not peculiar to him. 

* The natural man discerneth not the things of the 
Spirit^ for they are foolishness to him ; and he can- 
not know them, for they are spiritually discerned. 
But he that is spiritual judgelh, (or discerneth) all 
things ; yet he himself is judged (or discerned) of 
no man.' I ])relend not to say that our antagonist 
is what the apostle means by a natural man, any 
farther than his own confession of his ignorance of 
those spiritual things which can only be revealed to 
U3 by fii^ Spirit^ and the acknowledged sinfulness of 
his heart, will justify the application of that term to 
him. To his own Master he must stand or fall. 

This same witness is appealed to, Rom. ix. 1. 

* 1 say the truth in Christ, 1 lie not, my conscience 
also bearing me witness (cvjjifjLoc^Tv^ovan;, joint wit- 
ness) in, (iv by or with) the Holy Ghost.' That 
is, the Holy Spirit witnesses to my conscience, that 
what I am about to say respecting my grief con- 
cerning my brethren the Israelites, is a solemn 
truth, and no lie. And to close the catalogue of in- 
spired writers upon this subject, permit St. John, 
the beloved disciple, to give his deposition : ' He 
that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness 
in himself.' Can any man suppose that our own 
spirit would be likely to bear a more infallible tes- 
timony to this important fact, that we are born of 
God, than the eternal Spirit himself? ' If we re- 
ceive the witness of man, the witness of God is 
greater.' And certainly God is able to make an 
impression of himself, of his own image, upon the 
souls of his children, and by a direct operation of 
bis Spirit upon the heart, make known the fact, that 



^62 ©N THE WITNESS AND 

we are brought from the kingdom of darkness into 
the kingdom of his dear Son. We do not wish to 
contend for a word. We call it the direct witness 
of the Spirit, because we believe, that, through 
whatever medium it may be communicated, it comes 
direct from God, and gives a direct and sealing evi- 
dence of our acceptance in the beloved. It is be- 
lieved that our opponents would have much more 
reason to contend with us, were we to say it is an 
oblique, circuitous, obscure, or indirect witness ; and 
yet, if they oppose us for calling it a direct witness^ 
they must substitute some such term, to express 
their ideas in opposition to ours. 

Reader, weigh well the above proof direct from 
scripture ; and then say, if we can desire more di- 
rect, positive, and explicit testimony to any matter of 
fact. This is the fact— that it is the privilege of all 
Christians to have the internal witness of the Spirit 
that they are the children of God. In support of this 
fact, the inspired writers testify in the most unambig- 
uous language ; and that in a great variety of places. 
But Mr. W. prays that he may be " able effectually 
to expose and drive it out of the world." He may 
now try his strength. If he can effectually drive 
all the external and internal evidences of Christian- 
ity out of the world, by proving that its authors have 
given a false testimony^ he will accomplish his 
wish, and merit the thanks of all infidels, for doing 
that for them which none of them have yet been 
able to do for themselves. But we humbly trust 
his arm is not sufficiently nerved for this hercu- 
leaA woi'k. The eternal Rock on which Chris- 
tianity stands, will effectually resist all the assaults 
of its enemies ; and the eternal Spirit, which is the 
consolation, support, and infallible witness of all 
true Christians, will rise from the combat of its op- 
posers, and present the truth of his own infallible 
testimony, so substantial and transcendent, as will 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 26S 

eftectually silence all opposition, and make the 
confused retreat of error the more disastrous and 
disgraceful. 

In respect to the fruits of the Spirit, Mr. W. 
seems willing to allow there may be a reality in 
them. But this concession is not sufficient of itself 
to save Christianity from that destruction which 
will be effected, if he can " effectually expose and 
drive the direct witness of the Spirit out of the 
world !" It being manifest, that if the Tree upon 
which the fruit grows, be driven, by a Hopkinsian 
whirlwind, out of the world, the fnnt cannot long 
remain- If by ihe fruits of the Spirit, such as lov€y 
peace, joy m the Holy Ghost, patience, meekness^ 
temperance, gentleness, faith and goodjicss, he meant 
true religion in (he heart, as Mr. W. is willmg to 
allow, how can these fruits appear, unless the S|)irit 
himself, by whom they are produced, nourished, 
and perpetuated, be present in the heart ? Can the 
tree live, and bear fruit, when separated from the 
earth, from whence it derives its nourishment ? And 
can the fruits of the Spirit grow in the heart, unless 
that heart be united to the Spirit, from whence the 
heart receives its spiritual nourishment? It is in- 
conceivable, to me at least, how the fruits of the 
Spirit can exist in the heart, unless the Spirit be 
present to produce them. 

While the tree is united to its mother earth, from 
whence it receives its nourishment, we may reason- 
ably expect the fruit in its season. But separate 
it, the life departs, the leaves wither, and the fruit 
falleth off. The appearance of fruit, then, is a cer- 
tain indication that there is vegetable life in the tree. 
So the appearance of the fruit of the Spirit is an 
infallible evidence, not only that there is spiritual 
life in the heart of the man upon whom the fruit is 
visible, but also a certain evidence that the Spirit 
himself, from whom the Christian receives his con- 



264 ON THE WITNESS AND 

tinual nourishment, is now witnessing, or uniting 
himself with the spirit of the Christian. The fruit 
then, of the Spirit, is a witness for the Spirit him- 
self, presenting an indubitable testimony to all who 
are capable of discerning spiritual things, that the 
Divine Spirit now dwells in the heart. Although a 
superficial observer may test the natupe and quality 
of the tree by its fruit only, (if he has been pre- 
viously acquainted with such fruit,) yet a chymist, 
wishing to make a more minute investigation, would, 
by a regular process, separate its component parts, 
and analyze its primitive elements ; and thus de- 
monstrate, by actual experiment, what are its con- 
stituents principles ; and by this means come to a 
direct evidence, independent of its fruits, to what 
genera and species the tree belongs. So those who 
wish to arrive to a thorough knowledge of their own 
character, may make a critical examination, ascer- 
tain the fact, by casting themselves into the alem- 
bic of God's truth, suffer themselves to be well re- 
fined by the fire of God's spirit, until they come 
forth bearing the sacred impression of God's image 
of righteousness and true holiness. They need not 
be satisfied with any superficial marks of the divine 
approbation ; but they may descend to the bottom 
of their hearts, guided continually by the light of 
God's truth, until they can find a direct evidence of 
the fact, that their hearts are changed, and that 
they are born from above — that the spirit of adop- 
tion now dwells in their hearts : Of this every experi- 
mental Christian may have a satisfactory evidence. 
When this is the case, his soul will be plentifully 
adorned with the graces of the Holy Spirit ; and he 
will find himself like a fruitful vine, growing and 
thriving in the garden of the Lord his God. 

Mr. W. thinks it a dangerous error to believe that 
this direct witness of the spirit should in the order 
ofnature,/?rec€<fe the existence of its fruits, p. 195. 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 265 

But pray tell us, must not the cause precede its 
effects ? And is it not this divine Spirit operating 
upon the heart, which is the cause of the fruits of 
the spirit with which the soul of the Christian is 
adorned ? How then, in the name of common 
sense I ask, can these fruits, or effects of the Spi- 
rit exist in the heart, before the existence and 
operation of that spirit which is the catise of them ? 
Or is it supposed that the fruits of the spirit can be 
produced, and perpetuated without the presence and 
direct operation of their cause ? Or that it is com- 
patible with the nature of things, and the economy 
of grace, that this Holy Spirit should directly ope- 
rate upon the heart, bringing pardon and peace, 
and we remain unconscious of it ? These questions 
cannot be answered in the affirmative without in- 
volving the most palpable absurdities. 

2. Let us attend to Mr. W.'s representation, or 
rather mwrepresentation of our views upon this all- 
important subject. It would seem that he possesses 
such a determined opposition to us, that, if he can- 
not oppose us successfully on the ground we occu- 
py, he will fix us upon an imaginary one, with the 
hope of effecting our conquest. Thus, while rack- 
ing his invention to find out what we mean by the 
direct witness of the spirit, he says ; " It must then 
be an unaccountable impression made upon the 
mind, declaring without words, and without the di- 
vine nature imparted, that I am a child of God." 
p. 194. How candid all this! I take the liberty of 
affirming that a more palpable error cannot be 
propogated, than by saying, that we believe the 
direct witness of the spirit that I am a child of God, 
can exist where the divine nature is not imparled. 
No, such a blasphemous sentiment never entered 
our thoughts. Is this thy charity! Thy candour! 
Thou great lover of my soul? Dost thou think to 
convert me from my errors, and induce me to em- 

z 



266 ON THE WITNESS AND 

brace thy scheme, by uttering such groundless ac- 
cusations ? And shall I be more likely to obtain 
eternal salvation by embracing a system which 
would force me to such unkind assertions to defend 
myself? O thou vindicator of reformed doctrines ! 
Reform thyself, by retracting thy cruel charges 
against thy neighbour. And never more profess a 
concern for my salvation, until thou canst furnish 
better evidence of thine own integrity. Point, Sir, 
to a clause in my book, or in any other of our ap- 
proved publications, where such a sentiment is ad- 
vanced, or frankly acknowledge thy mistake. 

Such is the triumph of truth, that its opposers can 
have no prospect of success against it, without first 
distorting its features with the artificial tints of er- 
ror. While permitted to show its innocent face, 
truth stands with a modest, but fearless counte- 
nance. Even its enemies, it would seem, dare not 
assault it, without first clothing it with a false robe 
to make it appear odious. But this unfair conduct^ 
only gives the friends of truth an opportunity of ta- 
king off the fictitious robe, and of exhibiting it in 
its own native beauty, so that its attracting charms 
captivate all its admirers with love and affection. 
To do this in the present instance, we will, from 
respect to the reader, present him with written tes- 
timony against Mr. W.'s "assertion. Notice the fol- 
lowing passages. 'But when the word(holy) is ap- 
plied to Christians, it imports that all the powers of 
soul and body are solemnly dedicated to God. The 
internal 'prhwiph of holiness which is implanted in 
the heart by the Holy Spirit applying the merits of 
Christ, by which a thorough renovation is effected, 
is productive of external holiness : a holy walking 
with God, and a holy upright deportment in e\ery 
relation of life. When the soul enjoys this princi- 
ph of holiness^ and exhibits its correspondent tem- 
pers and conduct, there is the abiding witness of the 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 267 

Spirit, which is connected with a knowledge of our 
acceptance in the sight of God.' Errors of Hop. p. 
265. This quotation, which I think speaks an un- 
equivocal language, is extracted from the very book 
our antagonist had before him, when he affirmed 
that we hold to a direct witness of the spirit which did 
not impart the divine nature ! And has he pro- 
duced a single line from thai book to contradict the 
sentiments here expressed ? Not one ! ' Nor do we 
mean to assert that there can be any real testimony 
of the spirit, idthoxU ihc fruit of the spirit. We as- 
sert on the contrary, that the fruit of the spirit im- 
mediatc/ij springs from this inruard teslimoni/,^ Wes- 
ley's sermons, vol.ii, p. 36G, If these extracts do 
not make Mr. Williston ashamed of his erroneous 
assertions, 1 hope they will convince him, that he 
has betrayed a ^vant of Christian kindness, in thus 
distorting our sentiments upon one of the most de- 
licate, deep, and important points of Christian ex- 
perience and practice. 

But he cannot stop yet. To pour contempt upon 
us, he seems determined, if it ccst him his own 
reputation. Alluding to us as a body, he says, '' They 
are looking for the spirit to speak and bear witness 
in some way entirely distinct from his sanctifying 
^Iterations upon the heart" — *' are led to look for 
-omc other evidence of adoption besides the spirit 
of adoption : and for some other evidence that they 
Srlong to Christ, besides the Spirit of Christ ; and 
a life of conformity to him." p. 203. What shall 
we say to all this ? It is so notoriously false, that I 
^now not how to reply to it. To quote from our 
writings to disprove such strange assertions would 
130 as needless as to use arguments to prove the ex- 
istence of a material world, or to reason against a 
man were he to assert that two and two make only 
ihree : since all our writings, our sermons, our self- 
denial, our cautions to our people, and our insist- 



268 ON THE WITNESS AND 

ing that we must be internally and externally holy, 
or never enter heaven, all conspire together to con- 
tradict such assertions. To finish the climax of 
his cruel charges against us, he observes, p. 203. 
" Attention to this subject has led us to discover, 
(if we mistake not) the cause why our opponents do 
not talk of false and delusive hopes, as taking place 
among their own people. It has been remarked by 
those, who have had great opportunity to hear the 
Methodist preachers, that they do not preach, as if 
there were any danger that their converts would be 
deceived by a false hope." - When I read this sen- 
tence, I confess I was astonished beyond measure 
at the eflfrontery of this Mr. W. I challenge the 
world to produce a set of preachers, who have been 
more pointed in their appeals to the consciences of 
both saints and sinners, and who have more ear- 
nestly exhorted them to examine themselves whether 
they be in the faith. Let any man read over Mr. 
Wesley's Sermons — Fletcher's Checks, especially 
the last volume — his Appeal — Pauson's and Ben- 
son's Sermons — Law's Serious Call to a Holy Life- 
Baxter's Saints Rest— Travels of True Godliness, 
and our Discipline ; all of which are published by us 
and widely circulated among our people ; and thea 
judge of Mr. W.'s candour and Christian charity. 
J know not who those remarkers are that had such 
frequent opportunities of hearing the Methodists ; 
but this I will venture to affirm, without any fear of 
"being contradicted by any person competent to de- 
cide, that be they who they may, they have given a 
wrong testimony. For my part, I have had " great 
opportunity of hearing the Methodists ;" and I have 
also had considerable opportunity of hearing most 
other denominations, before my conversion, and 
since ; and I can say, I have never, among any, 
witnessed so much caution in examining the foun- 
dation of our hope, and of testing the genuineness 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 269 

of our experience in divine things, as among the 
Methodists. Indeed, it is their peculiar theme to 
insist upon a direct, and indirect, an internal and ecc - 
ternal evidence of our union with God ; continually 
enforcing the apostolic declaration, If any man saith 
that he knoweth God, and keepeth not his command- 
ments, he is a liar, 1 am not at all concerned that 
the above phillipic of Mr. W. will gain any credit, 
where we are known, and where candour takes the 
umpire in the breast. But this does not lessen 
the turpitude of his offence, or render it entirely 
useless to contradict his unsupported assertions. 

What shall we say to all this ? By what strange 
infatuation was he led to expose his reputation as 
an author, and as a Christian minister. Our pity is 
moved towards Mr. Williston. So far from feeling 
any animosity or resentment for his numerous accu- 
sations, that we tenderly commisserate the unhappi- 
ness of the man who is reduced to such a dilemma 
to defend his scheme, and to oppose his polemical 
adversaries. He was endeavouring to oppose a 
truth, which presented such an open and formidable 
face that he could not withstand the glory of its 
countenance, nor consistently screen himself from 
its enlightening rays. What then is to be done ? 
Why, this chaste offspring of the Most High, must 
be disfigured, and then we will say, ' The Metho- 
dists have done it. And we will have the honour 
of chastising them for their rude conduct.' To the 
awful tribunal of God, is Mr. W. responsible ; and 
to that tribunal is he refered for the many erro- 
neous representations he has made of our doctrine 
— a doctrine so conformable to truth, that a consci- 
ousness of his inability to oppose it with success, 
led him to this ungenerous method, of distorting 
and mutilating for the unmanly pm-pose of expo- 
sing it to contempt. But I recollect myself. Be- 
fore that eventful period arrives, I hope repentance 

z 2 



270 ON THE WITNESS AND 

may atone for his faults, the blood of Christ wash 
them all away, and the Holy Spirit bring a direct 
witness to his heart that his iniquities are forgiven, 
and his sins covered* 

As an evidence of the confused state of his mind 
upon this subject, we may observe, that, notwith- 
standing he has asserted, that we believe in having 
the direct witness of the Spirit, " without having 
the divine nature imparted," and in having " some 
other evidence of our adoption, besides the Spirit of 
adoption," and " some other evidence that we be- 
long to Christ, besides the Spirit of Christ ;" J say 
notwithstanding all this, he has said in p. 201 . — 
'• By the indirect witness of the Spirit, they mean 
the new nature imparted by the Spirit's influence." 
Here then, after being traduced as heretics and dan- 
gerous enthusiasts, as holding to didirect witness of the 
Spirit without the divine nature, we are dubed with 
orthodoxy, represented as holding to such an in- 
fluence of the Spirit, {direct I suppose if it come direct- 
III from God,) as produces the new nature, which is the 
indirect evidence of our union with God by faith in 
Christ. For a man to contradict scripture, and to 
reason against reason, is impious and absurd 5 but 
to contradict himself, only shews the want of re- 
collection, or an undue partiality to a favourite hy- 
pothesis. That Mr. W. contradicts himself will 
appear indubitable, if we proceed, 

3. To confirm the doctrine for which we contend 
Iby Mr. W. himself, and some Calvinistic authors. 
In the following passage, taken from p. 200 of his 
book, he fully declares his faith in the very truth, 
for which we contend, and which he z«ow/c? were out 
of the world; to every word of which we cordially 
subscribe. " Let it be clearly understood, that we 
believe the Scriptures of the Old and New Testa- 
ments to be the only standard of religious truth, 
and a sufficient guide for us, so long as we continue 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 271^ 

in this world. By this standard are to be tried all 
doctrines, all feelings, and whatever relates to prac- 
tice. * Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light 
unto my path.' Psal. cxix. 105. The following 
text we consider as applicable to all who speak to 
us, whether by an audible voice to the ear, or by a 
secret whisper, or impression, to the mind : ' To 
the law and to the testimony : if they speak not ac- 
cording to this word, it is because there is no light 
in them.' Isa. viii. 20. Therefore we make no 
dependence on any internal witness of the Spirit, 
which cannot be proved by the word to be a true 
toitness. That w^hich is contained in the bible is the 
written witness of the Spirit, since holy men spake as 
they were moved by the Holy Ghost. Here is the 
standing and unalterable testimony of the Spirit, 
with respect to the nature and effects of true reli- 
gion, even that religion which God will approve- 
But my reading of this testimony of the Spirit, with 
an unrenewed heart, can give me no evidence that I 
am a child of God. On the contrary it all stands 
against me, and testifies that 1 have no part nor lot 
in this matter. But when the Spirit condescends to 
write upon my heart, the same religion," (Here 
is what we mean by the direct witness of the 
Spirit — His writing vpon the heart, the same religi- 
on) " which he has revealed in the scriptures, this 
may be called his living witness,^^ Did Mr. W. 
suppose that we believed the direct witness, was a 
dead witness ? Call it then a living witness, because 
it comes from the living God, and brings a direct 
and living testimony, that " the same religion," 
which consists of righteousness, peace and joy in the 
Holy Ghost as that " revealed in the scriptures" is 
noiv written upon the heart, by the Spirit of the 
Living God, Mr. W. continues : " and it is known 
by our spirit, that is by our rational soul, to be his 
witness, and no delusion, by its agreement with his 
standing and unalterable testimony, which is given 



272 ON THE WITNESS AND 

in the scripture of truth. Religion, as contained ia 
the Bible, is something which is enjoined us, and its 
nature and effects are described ; but religion, when 
communicated to the heart by the Holy Spirit," " is 
inward and outward obedience to those injunctions ; 
— it is feeling and action. It is, in fine, the actual 
existence of the thing in life, which is there only 
described in tworJs." We are thankful for this frank 
declaration in favour of the grand, scriptural doc- 
trine of internal and external godliness ; and for the 
distinction between the direct and indirect w^itness 
of the Spirit. 

This however he is not willing to grant. " By 
this it will be seen that we make no distinction be- 
tween what our theological opponents call the di- 
rect and indirect witness of the Spirit : and we are 
persuaded that no such distinction ought to be 
made." ^ What ! Has he not made a distinction, by 
speaking of the Spirit's writing the religion of the 
Bible upon the heart ? and by calling this roriting a 
living testimony, which is known by our Spirit ? 
l^he fruits of the Spirit are produced in our spirit, 
where they grow and thrive, while nourished by 
the Holy Spirit ; and therefore, if it is our spirit 
which knows the living witness of the Holy Spirit, 
we must know it to be something distinct from the 
fruits of the Spirit, which are engrafted into our 
spirit, and are what we have called the indirect wit- 
ness of our adoption into the family of Christ. 

To write is one thing ; and what is written is an- 
other. The act of writing upon the heart of a pen- 
itent believer pardon and peace, is the act of God, 
who, by his Holy Spirit gives the direct testimony 
that all our sins are forgiven us for Christ's sake : 
The truth written is this pardon itself, with the 
peace, joy, <&c. which accompany it 5 and we are 
enabled to read it by our own minds, our rational 
souls, while thus guided in their enquiry after spir- 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 273 

itual things, by the eternal Spirit of truth. We 
grant, that, at times, this direct witness may be ob- 
scured by clouds of temptations, and the thick fog 
of adversity, so that we cannot immediately per- 
ceive it : and then, to prevent despair, we must 
search for the fruits of the Spirit, and examine our 
conduct, and see if it be in conformity to the mo- 
rality of the gospel. Finding the existence of these 
fruits, accompanied by a correspondent conduct, 
we have reason to conclude that the Spirit himself, 
the cause of these fruits, must also be present : and 
by waiting upon the Lord in obedience to his will, 
the Sun of righteousness will so shine forth upon 
the soul, as to disperse the clouds and darkness, 
and his sacred beams will directly witness to our 
souls, that we are now accepted in the beloved. 
We know, indeed, that it is extremely difficult to 
communicate, in appropriate language, these deep 
things of God; but, it is presumed that the above 
statement will be sufficiently intelligible to all ex- 
perimental Christians. Their own happy experi- 
ence will supply the defects of human language. 
God speaks to the heart — in power and majesty — 
and his words are full of comfort to the believing 
soul, while a stranger understands not his voice. 
His sheep however, hear his voice^ and understand 
his language. 

Moreover, are not the holy scriptures also, in 
some sense, the fruits of the Spirit ; and when the 
holy men spake as they were moved by the Hoiy 
Ghost, did they not speak under the direct influence 
of that Holy Ghost ? For our part, we can have no 
perception how there can be diuy fruits of the Spirit, 
unless there be frst a direct operation of the Spirit 
himself to produce them. It seems no less absurd, 
than to suppose the world, which is an effect, or 
fruit of omnipotent power, could have existed an- 
terior to the direct exertion of that power ; which 



274 OF THE WITNESS AND 

is the same as to say an effect has an actual exi»t-- 
ence before the cause which produces it, is in actual 
operation. Error will eventually absume itself. 

That we are not singular in contending for this 
direct and internal witness of the Spirit, is farther 
manifest from the following quotations from Calvin- 
istic authors. The first is taken from Mr. Ws 
book, p. 199, which he has borrowed from Presi- 
dent Edwards' life. ' The first that I remember 
that I ever found any thing of that sort of mwarc?, 
sweet delight in God and divine things, that 1 have 
lived much in since, was on reading these words, 1 
Tim. i. 17. JVozo unto the King eternal^ immortal^ 
invisible^ the only zvise God, be honour and glori/y 
for ever and ever. Amen* As I read these words 
there came into my soul, and was as it were diffused 
through it, a sense of the glory of the divine Be- 
ing ; a new sense, quite different from any thing I 
ever experienced before.' Now, how did this 
* sense of the divine glory,' ' come into his soul,' 
and become ' diffused through it,' unless it were 
by a direct operation of the Spirit ? This Spirit 
first came into his soul — this is what we have de- 
nominated the direct witness of the Spirit : Then, 
secondly, it was ' diffused through it^^ by which he 
had an ' imoard and sweet delight of God and di- 
vine things' — here is the fruit of the Spirit, which 
we have called the indirect witness. And although 
it did not immediately occur to ' his mind there 
was any thing saving in all this,' yet he afterwards 
found a satisfactory evidence of it ; for he says it 
%vas the same ' sweet delight in God and divine 
things that he had lived much in since.' If there- 
fore his experience of spiritual things was genuine, 
and we doubt not but it w^as, he then received a 
direct evidence by the Divine Spirit, (and that too, 
by an application of a particular text of scripture 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 275 

to liis mind, which Mr. W. thinks a dangerous de- 
lusion for us to trust in,) that he was born of God, 
The next evidence I adduce is (he learned Wit- 
siusy who wrote towards the close of the seven- 
teenth century. After having spoken largely upon 
the nature and spirit of adoption ; and having 
shewn that the promise which Jesus Christ made 
of the Holy Spirit to his disciples, was not restrict- 
ed to the apostles and primitive Christians, but is 
the common privilege of all believers, he observes — 

* But let us now consider the other effects of the 
Spirit, which, according to the apostle, consists in 
this, that he hcareth witness with our spirits^ that we 
are the children of God. Here we have two wit- 
7iesses, agreeing in 07ie testimony* The one is a 
lower rafik, our spirit ; the other of the higher, the 
Spirit of adoption^ who is the Spirit of the Son of 
God. — By our Spirit is understood, the mind and 
conscience of every believer, whereby he may be 
conscious of what passes in his own heart, la 
this sense the apostle said. What man knoweth the 
things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in 
■am — ' The testimony of this our spirit consists in 
an exact representation of our state by cerfain 
marks, and 2ifull assurance of faith, which is ftl- 
lowcd"^ (here are ihc fruits of the S|)iri!) ' by a 
most quiet tranquillity, and a joy uns])eakable.' — 
zle then proceeds to speak of those marks which he 
calls infallible. 1. * Good disposiiions.' 2. 'A 
holy conformity to our Father and elder Brother.' 
3. ' A new life.' 4. ' A true and sincere love to 
God.' 6, * A filial reverence and obedience.' 6. 

* Unfeigned brotherly love.' These are what we 
have called the fruits, or indirect witness of the 
spirit. 7. ' Hence it is, says he, that, while they 
are sometimes ravished on high by his Spirit, he 
surrounds them with the beams of his supercelestial 
ifght, gives them a view of his face shining with 



276 ON THE WITNESS AND 

the brightest love, kisses them with the kisses of 
his mouth, admits them to the most endearing mu- 
tual intercourse of mystical love with himself, and, 
plentifully shedding abroad his love in their hearts, 
he gives them to drink of rivers of honey and but- 
ter,* &c. — ' Then at length they entirely acquiesce, 
when to the testimony of their own spirit is super- 
added that of the Spirit of God? — * That testimony- 
is given principally in the following manner. First, 
the Spirit of God makes those holy habits, which, 
we have said, were the distinguishing marks of the 
children of God ; and which at times are often in- 
volved in much darkness, and covered with much 
rubbish and filth, to shine with clearness in their 
souls, and, as it were, readily present themselves to 
the contemplation of the mind when examining it- 
self. And then it excites our spirit, otherwise lan- 
guid, to the diligent observation of our mind, both 
transacted in and by it, enlightens the eyes of the 
understanding with supernatural light, to prevent 
our being deceived with what is specious rather 
than solid, or our overlooking those things, on the 
observation of w^hich our consolation depends. — 
There is, moreover, a certain internal instinct, 
which no human language can explain, immediate- 
ly ASSURING God's beloved people of their adop- 
tion, no less than if, being carried up to the third 
heavens, they had heard audibly from God's own 
mouth : as the apostle formerly heard in the holy 
mount, a voice from the excellent glory. Lastly, 
seeing no testimony is stronger than that which is 
proved by facts, the Spirit of God does not leave 
himself MzMow/ witness in that respect; exciting 
generous motions' (that is, as we have expressed 
it, producing in the heart by his direct operations 
the indirect witness of the Spirit) 'and the sweet- 
est raptures in believers, and delighting them with 
consolations so ravishing and extatical, and even 



FRUITS OP THE SPIRIT. 277 

exceeding all conceplions, that they cannot con- 
sider them in any other light, but as so many' (in- 
direct) * testimonies of their adoption.' * Nor is 
there any reason to apprehend, that the Children 
of God will, in this case, suffer themselves to be 
imposed upon, or admit for a testimony of the Holy 
Spirit, what is a lie and mere illusion of the de- 
ceiving spirit.' I beseech the reader to consider 
well the following words, which are as explicit in 
favour of what we call the direct zoitiiess of the Spi- 
rit^ as words can be : we only object to the words, 
' Irresistible power.' ' For in this voice of the Spi' 
rit of God, there is so much clearness^ so much ma- 
jesty, and so much efficacy whereby it penetrates ^ 
with an irresistable power, into the bottom and 
inmost recesses of the heart, that they who have 
been accustomed to that voice, can easily distin- 
guish it from all others. The world, certainly, 
cannot receive this spirit, seeth him not, neither knovs- 
eth him ; but Christ'^s sheep know the voice of their 
Shepherd. And when it sounds, not so much in their 
ears as in their hearts, they joyfully exclaim, This 
is the voice of my beloved, behold! he cometh,^ Wit- 
sius on the Covenants, vol. ii. p. 203 — 212. 

I know not how human language can niore forci- 
bly express the necessity, utility, and certainty of 
the witness of God's spirit directly witnessing to the 
heart of every believer that he is a child of God, 
than the above extracts from this pious reformer. 
And Witsius was no canting enthusiast ; but a Cal- 
vinistic author of great merit, according to the ac- 
knowledgment of, I believe, most ministers of that 
order : and although we greatly differ from him, 
respecting unconditional election, &c. yet I think 
bis work worthy of being read, especially those 
parts which relate to Christian experience and prac- 
tice. We could hope that he has treated his Ar^ 

A a 



278 ON THE WITNESS AND 

minian opponents with greater liberality than Mr. 
W. has the Methodists. 

Another evidence in favour of the truth which we 
consider so unspeakably precious, is taken from the 
confession of faith of the Presbyterian Church, ch. 
18. p.P' 85, 86. ' The infallible assurance of faitk 
is founded upon the divine truth of the promise of 
salvation, the inward evidence of those graces unto 
which these promises are made, the testimony of the 
spirit of adoption^ witnessing ty?*fA our spirit, that we 
are the children of God ; which spirit is the earnest 
of our inheritance, whereby we are sealed unto the 
day of redemption/ Here also we have a positive 
and explicit testimony in favour of this grand scrip- 
tural doctrine : and not the testimony of an indivi- 
dual, but of the whole body of Presbyterians who 
acknowledge that confession of faith as their stand- 
ard. And it should be remarked, that in this quota- 
tion, the graces of the spirit which we have called 
its fruits and its indirect witness, are clearly distin- 
guished, both from our own spirit, and from the 
Spirit of God; which last is what we have called 
the direct witness of the spirit, but which the com- 
pilers of this confession have denominated the tes- 
timony of the spirit of adoption ; saying that it is 
this divine Spirit which witnesseth with our spirit, 
that we are the children of God. But Mr. W. is 
"persuaded that no such distinction should be 
made ;" and yet, strange to tell, he has not only 
made it himself, but sets himself up for the vindi- 
cator of the doctrines of the Reformers, who, with 
much caution and precision, have made the very 
distinction for which we have contended. And it is 
an admirable proof of the perspicuity with which this 
doctrine is revealed in the holy scriptures, and of 
its conformity to the experience of true Christian?, 
to find so many different writers, and those too, who 
disagreed in some very important points as much 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 279 

as Wesley and Witsius^ the Meihodists and Preshy- 
ierians, should nevertheless exhibit such coincidence 
of sentiment on the witness and fruits of the holy 
Spirit. Let any man compare the preceding quo- 
tations from Edwards, Witsius, and the Presbyteri- 
an Confession of Faith, with what Wesley, Fletch- 
er and the Methodists have written upon this sub- 
ject, and he must be convinced that the discrepance 
is merely verbal ; and that they have all appealed to 
the same texts of scripture for proof of their dec- 
trine. If therefore, Mr. W.'s intellectual arm be 
sufficiently strong to drive the bible, Wesley and 
others, Witsius, Edwards and the Presbyterian 
Confession of Faith, out of the ivorld, he may then 
drive out the witness of the Spirit also. We have 
no fears, however, for the safety of this truth. Sup- 
ported as it is by the infallible word of the living 
God, it raises its fearless head, bidding defiance to 
the puny attacks of its assailants, and calmly re- 
clining itself in the bosom of Him who hath said ; 
* But the Comforter which is the Holy Gho^t, whom 
the Father will send in my name, he shall teach 
you all things, and bring all things to your remem- 
brance whatsoever 1 have said unto you.' John xiv. 
26. May God seal this saving truth upon the con- 
sciences of all our readers. 

Of all the doctrines of the gospel, this ought to 
be ])ressed upon mankind with the utmost earnest- 
ness. This, as well as human depravity, conviction 
for sin, repentance, the exercise of faith, justifica- 
tion and saiictification, must be tested by actual ex- 
periment. If this tesiimjMiy be, as it unquestiona- 
bly is, a direct and ini/illible witness to the heart, 
by which the believing Christian may know that he 
is an heir of God^ and a joint heir with Jesus Christy 
then every one ought to be extremely cautious not 
to rest satisfied until he attain to an experimental 
knowledeje of this witness. Let no man, therefore. 



280 ON THE WITNESS AKD 

deceive himself with ^ false hope. The experi- 
enced Christian does not hope that he is converted 
or born of the spirit : of this he has the direct and 
indirect witness of the spirit; and their joint testi- 
mony mutually assist and strengthen each other, 
always occupying the heart at one and the same 
lime, the one being the cause, and the other the ef- 
fect ; and are always productive of a uniform obe- 
dience to the commandments of God. 

Hope is not occupied about present^ but future 
objects. The Christian indeed, has a hope full of 
immortality, like an anchor to the soul^ both sure and 
stcdfast ; entering into that within the veil, whither 
J esus the forerunner hath for us entered: but this 
hope^ grounded upon the present knowledge of his 
acceptance in the beloved, looks beyond 'the 
bounds of time and space' to the celestial hill of 
God, where the saints reign in perrenial happiness. 
When a sihner is convicted of sin, indulges a godly 
sorrow for it, resolving by the grace of God to for- 
sake it, he may then hope for foi'giveness : Having 
obtained forgiveness for the sake of Jesus Christ, 
received the witness of his adoption into the family 
of Christ, if he continues to walk in the light as God 
is in the light, he may scripturally and reasonably 
hope for perfect sanctification ; and while thus per- 
severing under ihe influence of that Spirit which 
bears witness with his spirit that he is a child of 
God, he has a well grounded hope that he shall 
eventually attain to everlasting felicity. This is 
the ' Hope which maketh not ashamed ; because 
the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the 
Holy Gho&t, which is given unto us,' Rom. v. 5, 
And this is the hope ' by which we are saved' from 
despair through every stage of our spiritual pilgrim- 
age. Let it be remarked, that none canr have any 
good reason to believe he has altaiaed^to this wit- 
ness of ihe Spirit, unless he has previouslj? h§id his 



FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT. 281 

heart deeply penetrated on account of his sinful- 
ness, by which he has been brought to that hum- 
bling view of himself, which has extorted the con- 
fession, Lord! I am vile; what shall I answer? 
Under this penetrating sense of his native viieness, 
and the sinfulness of his life, he must be brought to 
the foot of the cross, and like a condemned criminal 
beg for pardon and salvation. It is not enough 
merely to be sensible of our spiritual disease, to 
acknowledge our guilt, and to effect an external 
reformation, but we must have an application of the 
healing efficacy of Jesus' blood, be delivered from 
our guilt, and have a thorough internal reformation 
effected by the Holy Ghost. And when this gra- 
cious work is effected in the heart, it is accompa* 
nied with the direct and indirect witness of the spi- 
rit ; and is followed by a life of conformity to the 
precepts of the gospel of Jesus Christ. 

Let all, therefore, into whose hands this book 
may fall, conscientiously and carefully examine 
themselves upon this interesting subject. Let them 
not delude themselves into a belief that they shall 
be eternally saved, merely because they have had 
some sorrow for sin, have openly professed a belief 
in the doctrine of the Gospel, and now hope, mere- 
ly, that they are juslilied. If you have the religion 
of the heart, such as the bible requires of you, you 
do not hope you have it. No ; of this you have, es- 
pecially when the brightness of God's reconciled 
countenance shines upon your soul, no doubt. And 
if at any time you are in heaviness through manifold 
temptations^ still, if you hold fast faith and a good 
conscience, earnestly pressing forward in the way 
of selt-denial. The swi of righttousticss will rise 
upon your soul wiih such brightness, as to dissipate 
the intellectual clouds from your mind, and cause 
you to shout, from a feeling sense of his pardoning 
love, the wonders of redeeming grace. Do not 

A a 2 



^82 ON THE WITNESS ScC. 

then deceive yourself with an imaginary witness 
of your acceptance with God, before you have 
groaned under a deep and piercing sense of your 
guihy and lost estate by nature and practice ; and 
have cast your burdened soul upon the Lord Jesus 
as your only Saviour. But even then, if the inter- 
nal witness you thought you had received, does not 
immediately produce the fruits of the Spirit ; such 
as love to God and your neighbour ; joy in the Ho- 
ly Ghost ; patience in the midst of crosses and disap- 
pointments ; meekness of submission to God's govern- 
ment; genf/ene55 of deportment towards all men ; hu- 
mility amidst reproaches, poverty and riches ; good- 
ness in answering the end of your first and second 
creation ; faith ovjiidelity in the performance of ev- 
ery civil, religious, an»d moral duty ; and temperance 
in the government of all the appetites and passions 
of the body and soul ; — I say, if these do not imme- 
diately follow your professed renovation, you have 
reason to suspect that, your experience was delu- 
sive. If a man only examine by one of the witness- 
es, he is ever liable to be deceived : but if he ex- 
amine by the three, the internal witness of the Spi- 
rit, its fruits, and a life of piety to God, and benevo- 
lence to man, (if this latter be not rather included or 
implied in the second witness,) and if he can cor- 
rectly ascertain the fact, so as to conclude he has 
them all, I cannot see how such a man can easily 
be deceived. A man, indeed, who only hopes him- 
self a Christian, is not only continually liable to 
deception, but he can never determine whether he 
is deceived or no ; because while a man only hopes 
for a thing, his mind is suspended in more or less 
uncertainty 5 as it supposes the absence of the thing 
for which he hopes. There is, therefore, no other 
correct method to avoid deception, than by arriving 
to a scriptural certainty that we are in the good and 
right way. Let all men then, who value the eter- 
Bal salvation of their immortal souls, test their char* 



ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 

acter by the three infallible witnesses we have nam- 
ed, viz. the direct and indirect witness of the Spirit, 
and the external conformity of the conduct to the 
commanjmcnts of God. These three must go to- 
gether, and bear their joint testimony to the same 
fact, viz. that we are the children of God, and in the 
way to the kingdom of glory. If then you find your- 
self destitute of either, search, — pray, — wrestle in 
earnest prayer until the Lord shine upon your soul, 
and you are effebled to say with delight, This is my 
beloved, and this is my friend. 



CHAPTER VII. 

On Christian Benevolenc^m 

On what Mr. Williston has written concerning 
disinterested benevolence, we do not find much to 
object, if what he has said in p. 207 may be consid- 
ered a just explanation of what the Hopkinsians 
mean by that phrase ; namely, " When it is used in 
opposition to selfishness it is evident that it cannot 
mean the same as ?io interest, but rather as pointing 
to another sort of interest, totally diflerent from the 
interest sought by a selfish being :" because we al- 
ways believed that when the heart of a sinner is 
changed by the grace of God, he seeks a " totally 
different interest*' from what he did while under 
the power of the carnal mind ; and also because 
Mr. W. admits in the above quotation, that the 
Christian may seek his own interest, or his own 
spiritual happiness ; and therefore need not be dis- 
interested, according to the literal acceptation of 
that word. Nevertheless, we think the phrase is 
very unhappily chosen, because it conveys an idea 
totally different from the sentiment expressed in the 



284 ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 

above quotation ; and therefore I am not convicted 
that my objections to his manner of expressing him- 
self " are a mere playjupon words" as he intimated 
they are : for, if it be admitted that a Christian may 
have a suitable regard to his own happiness in all he 
does, then it is conceded that (disinterested benevo- 
lence is ' something to which man is a total stran- 
ger.' Why then contend for this theoretical phan- 
tom ? How much safer to adopt the scripture phrase- 
ology upon this subject, which says, true religion 
consists in Loving God with all the hearty and our 
neighbour as ourselves ; than to run into the metaphy- 
sical refinements oi abstract love, disinterested benev- 
olence, &LC, These terms, even as Mr. W. himself 
has explained his meaning, convey r\& determinate 
and intelligible idea ; for he admits that it is per- 
fectly consistent to have respect to our own present 
and eternal interest ; (and he could not do other- 
wise without flying directly in the face of God's 
word ;) and that according to our Lord's declara- 
tion, our love to Ourselves should be the standard 
©f love to our neighbour. Why then perplex the 
minds of men with a phraseology perfectly unintel- 
igible ? and plead for that which cannot exist ? 
Philosophers had long turned the moral world up- 
side down, (and some totally annihilating the meta- 
rial world,) with their hypothetical speculations 
upon the agreement and disagreement of floating 
ideas, as the foundation of human knowledge — until 
a Beatie and a Reid arose, and presented us with 
substantial realities. And shall the Christian world 
be deluged with the phantasms of abstract beauty^ 
love to being in general, and disinterested benevo- 
lence, to the destruction of that substantial love of 
God and our neighbour, and that regard to our own 
welfare which is compatible with both ? 

If Mr. W. had carefully attended to my remarks, 
he might have saved himself much of what he has 



ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 285 

written in vindicf^tion of his views, upon this sub- 
ject. In page !269 of the Errors, <i^c. it was ob- 
served, * According to your representation, the di- 
viding line between them, (the regenerate and un- 
regenerate) is, the one has a supreme regard to 
self, and the other a supreme regard to God. This, 
said I, may be accurate enough : but the way in 
which you express yourself about disinterested be- 
nevolence^ hdiS a tendency to perplex the mind.' By 
this it will be perceived that we oh]eci principally^ 
though not wholly, to the manner in which they ex- 
press themselves upon this subject : and if Mr. W, 
in the above words quoted from his vindication, and 
what he has said p. 209, that I am " to value my 
neighbour's interest and happiness, as much as my 
own," be a correct statement of his views of Chris- 
tian benevolence, why has he written so much 
against our views of this divine principle? which 
were thus expressed; ^ That selfish principle which 
prompts an individual to seek his own happiness 
only, without any regard to the happiness of his fel- 
low-creatures, to be sure, is repugnant to the spirit 
of Christianity. The truly philanthropic soul ac- 
tuated by the love of God and man, will rejoice in 
the temporal and spiritual prosperity of others as 
well as his own.' Errors, S^c, p. 272. Certainly it 
ought to be the object of all men, and especially of 
polemical writers, to ascertain, if possible, precise- 
ly wherein they agree, and not strive merely to obtain 
victory by the sorceries of argument. »We know, and 
we never thought of denying it, that unregenerate 
men are selfish ; that however apparently benevo- 
lent their disposition, their motives, while uninfluen- 
ced by the Spirit of grace, arc sinfully selfish : and 
we are fully convinced, rthat whenever a radical 
change is eilected by the energies of the eternal 
Spirit, that supreme selfishness is destroyed, being 
succeeded by a spirit of true Christian benevolence, 



286 ON CHRISTIAN BtNEVOLENCE. 

which is characterized by love to God and man ; 
and which excites the Christian to deny himself oi 
every desire, every enjoyment, and of every prac- 
tice, which are incompatible with the glory of God, 
and with the temporal and spiritual welfare of his 
neighbour. If therefore our antagonists deem it 
their duty to oppose us, let them lay their objec- 
tions against this view of the subject; and not rep- 
resent us as teaching a doctrine which permits sin- 
ners to indulge their native selfishness, however 
averse it may be to the sacred honour of God, and 
the psesent and eternal welfare of their neighbour. 
Among all the earnest exhortations to self-denial, 
I have seen none so close, so pointed, so perspicu- 
ous and scriptural, as are to be found in the wri- 
tings of those justly honoured, and eminently useful 
servants of God, Messrs. John Wesley and John 
Fletcher. 

But though we agree, in the main, with Mr. W. 
as he has explained himself in the places refered to, 
yet we cannot subscribe to all he has advanced on 
this subject ; for we still perceive, in some places, a 
disposition to vindicate the idea of abstract love, 
that is, totally abstracted from any regard to our 
own happiness : and to this speculative notion of 
disinterested love, I think the objections mentioned 
in my public9tion, all remain unobviated by our 
opponent. That he manifests a disposition to de- 
fend this notion, which we have said is purely spec- 
ulative, (for we venture to affirm that no man ever 
proved its truth from experience, and it is certainly 
not contained in the word of God,) appears from 
what he has written p. 214. where, notwithstanding 
he had admitted that Christians who seek the glory 
of God and the welfare of their neighbour, also seek 
their own happiness, he observes ; " Therefore, if 
they were to loose their hope of being personally 
interested in the good of the universe, and yet re- 



ON CHRISTIAN RENEVOLEMCE. 28? 

tain their disinterested love, they would still seek 
and desire this great good, and would rejoice in the 
certainty that it was secured in the perfect govern- 
ment of Jehovah." This is only expressing with 
great obscurity, what Dr. Hopkins has expressed 
with great clearness, namely, that a sinner must be 
willing to be damned in order to be saved. It ought 
to be remarked that my objections to this strange 
no'.ion, of being willing to go to hell for the benefit of 
the universe, are <ill left unnoticed by Mr. W. and 
he expresses himself in this manner with as much 
confidence, as if nothing could be said against it. 

The 'irgument, when stript of its ambiguous 
garb, :i:id when dissected, will be found to contain 
many absurdities. It supposes, and asserts, that 
a man who has lost all hope of his own personal 
salvation^ may nevertheless possess disinterested 
benevolence : or in other words, he may possess 
what Mr. W. considers one of the most infallible 
evidences that he is a holy Christian, and yet have 
no hope of his own salvation : or to make it plain- 
er still, he may be a genuine follower of Christ, 
have an evidence that he has been born of the Spir- 
it, by which, according to our opponent, he is sure 
that he shall be eternally saved, and yet have no 
hope of his personal interest in Christ — be sure 
that he is in the road to heaven, and yet think him- 
self a candidate for hell fire ! How absurd. How 
can a man who is conscious of his having an inte- 
rest in Christ, because he possesses disinterested 
benevolence, at the same time have no hope of his 
personal salvation ? Or is it supposed that a man 
can be so holy as to be perfectly satisfied with the 
goTCj-nmejit of J ehovah, fully resigned to all his dis- 
pensations, and yet be so unconscious and insen- 
ble of it, as to conclude himself a reprobate, an 
enemy to God, and opposed to the divine gov- 
ernment ? Can we conceive it possible that a. 



288 ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 

Christian can be conscious of such a principle of 
benevolencje operating in his heart, as prompts 
him to seei after, and rejoice in the greatest good 
of the universe, and yet be so insensible of the love 
of God, which, to produce such a principle, must 
be in his heart, and so uncertain of his personal 
interest in Christ, as to " loose all hope of having 
a personal interest" in him ? If any man can per- 
ceive how these things can be, he may then per- 
ceive the consistency of a truly benevolent Chris- 
tian's being willing to be separated from God, the 
supreme object of his affections, forever* How 
incredible ! that a Cristian who loves God with all 
his heart, and his neighbour as himself, should at 
the same time be willing to be eternally separated 
from the God he loves, and from his neighbour with 
whom he delights to dwell; That is, in plain 
words, he must be willing to have his love to God 
turned into hatred^ and his Christian affection for his 
neighbours exchanged for variance and strife — be 
willing to become an enemy to God and his breth- 
ren forever. Is this the effect of disinterested be- 
nevolence ? If it is, may the good Lord deliver us 
all from it — lest, instead of being willing to go to 
heaven in obedience to God's will, we all turn ene- 
mies to him, and become willing to go to hell, and 
be at eternal enmity to ' God and all good.' Not- 
withstanding, therefore, all Mr. W. has said to the 
contrary in his explanatory note, it appears to us 
utterly impossible that such a thing can be, that a 
irifen who loves God supremely, and who rejoices in 
the manifestation of his glory, should be willing 
that he himself should become an object of divine 
hatred to all eternity. 

That when a sinner is awakened to a deep sense 
of his actual guilt and native vileness, he sees the 
justice oi his condemnation ; and that, if he were 
actually condemned eternally, he must, from a view 



ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 289 

of the righteousness of God's law, however un- 
willingly, acknowledge the justice of the decision, 
is freely admitted : but to say that after he is par- 
doned, his nature renewed, the love of God spread 
abroad in his heart, and he reconciled and united 
to God by faith in Jesus Christ, that he should at 
the same time be willing to be again condemned, 
become separated from, and unreconciled to God 
to all eternity, appears to us one of the most mon- 
strous absurdities imaginable. To refute it by ar- 
gument, is as impossible as it is needless. But 
when men make such strange assertions, and ad- 
vance such incredible paradoxies, they must be 
met, and their absurdity exposed in the best way 
we can. If a man were to assert that we must 
be willing absolutely to love God, and absolutely 
to hate him at the same time, how shall we refute 
the assertion by argument, or disprove it from 
scripture ? Absurdity is so prominent upon the very 
front of it, that no reasoning can make it more ap- 
parent, and no positive testimony, any more than 
what every man finds in his own breast, need be ad- 
duced to disprove it : But the above assertion of 
Mr. W. when stript of its ambiguous clothing, pre- 
sents, if not the very same, yet an absurdity equally 
glaring. Only let the Sun of truth dart his enlight- 
ening rays upon it, and its inconsistency will ap- 
pear in all its heightened colours. 

But because we oppose this Hopkinsian phan- 
tom of disinterested benevolence, Mr. W. insinu- 
ates that we " approve of those religious experi- 
ences which are really bottomed on selfishness," p. 
136. and hence he strives to impress the public 
with a belief that we ape the ancient Jewish phar- 
isees, who ' trusted in themselves that they were 
righteous,' ibid. How extremely solicitous is our 
ingenuous antagonist to dress us up in a borrowed 
robe, that he may have an opportunity of shewing 

B b 



290 ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 

his skill in exposing our nakedness with the tip 
of his pen. He is perfectly welcome to tear this 
antique robe to pieces ; for he will not then have 
touched our robe of righteousness given us from 
above, which effectually defends us from the lace- 
rating strokes of his controversial rod. 

Let us, however, see from whence he derived 
the information that we must be classed with the 
pharisees. Why '^ In their book of doctrines it is 
said, * There is a necessity of knowing his love, who 
first loved us, without which we cannot love him 
again.' p. 135. But does it necessarily follow be- 
cause we say w^e love God because he first loved 
us, that our religious experience is " bottomed on 
selfishness"? Is then the /ore of God, which we 
make the /o«nc?a/zon of our love to Him, seAfiskness? 
Can any better " bottom" or foundation of our love 
be found, than the love of God ? Or does Mr. W. 
suppose that his disinterested benevolence is better, 
or a more permanent foundation than that divine 
Love, which moved God the Father to give his Son 
a ransom for us all ? Why not then bring this objec- 
tion against St. John, because he said, God is love. 
We love him because he first loved ns ? Do they ob- 
ject to us for making the Love of God to us, a rea- 
son, or motive why w^e should love him in return '? 
But do not the inspired writers all along insist upon 
the Love of God as a motive to induce us to love 
Him ? God so loved the world — that whosoever believ- 
eth on him should have everlasting life. The good- 
ness of God leadeth thee to repentance. The long- 
suffering cfGod is salvation* What more command- 
ing or worthy motive can be presented to the hu- 
man mind to induce its love, than the infinite love 
of God? 

We w^ould, moreover, ask our polemical adver- 
saries, Whether they think it would have been pos- 
sible for any man to love God, unless He had first 



ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 291 

oved us? Or do they suppose zoe must Jirst love 
God before we can knov/ he has loved us ? He is 
loving to every man. This love existed in Him 
from eternity : and his love towards the human 
family changeth not.- If therefore, we are ever 
brought to know him at all, must we not know that 
He loved us before we loved Him? If it be a tnith^ 
as it certainly is. that God's love, which cternally 
existed in Him, demonstrated itself in the gift of 
Jesus Christ, and if we are ever brought to knozi} 
the truth as it is in Jesus^-vawsi we not also know 
that God loved us before we loved Him ? Even 
were we to allow that we must love God on account 
of his own perfections, or, as it is commonly ex- 
pressed, * For what he is in and of himself,' it 
docs not alter the case : for what is he in and of 
hims^l ? Is he not love ? And did he not of his own 
pure nJRon, moved thereto without any cause ex** 
traneoW from himself, execute the glorious scheme 
of Redemption and Salvation, by which is demon- 
strated his inlinite love to the human family ? It 
then we love him on account of his own glorious 
perfections, as those perfections led him to love us 
iVom eternity, Ave love him because he first loved 
us. How ean it be otherwise ? If God had not first 
loved us, so <is to give his Son to die for us, how 
rould we ever have loved him? Could we haveaton'ed 

or .our oicn sins ? have regenerated ourselves ? and 
have shed abroad his love in our own hearts, xmth- 
out the gift of Christ, and independently of the 
agency of the Holy Ghost ? Or do all these un- 
speakable blessings come to us after we love God ? 
Were we to teach such a doctrine as this, our oppo- 
nents in this controversy might very justly accuse 
us with reiterating the heresy of the Pharisees. 

When the Lord reveals himself to us as penitent 
omners, he reveals himself as a God of love, as hav- 
ing given himself for us ; and when that revelation of 



292 ON CHRISTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 

himself is made to our souls by the Holy Spirit, we 
perceive that he hath so loved us as to give his only 
begotten Son to be a propitiation for our sins, that 
we might be made the righteousness- of God in him ; 
and this love, thus manifesting itself to us, is the 
cause or reason of our love to God, without which 
we certainly never could have loved him. We do 
not indeed, love him merely because we are to be 
made happy by him ; although it is impossible for 
lis to separate the expectation of our own individual 
happiness, (I mean such a kind of happiness as 
Christianity imparts now, and promises hereafter,) 
from our supreme love to God ; because it is im- 
possible for us to love God, and at the same time be 
miserable : Holiness and happiness are inseparably 
connected together. Whenever the superlative ex- 
cellence of the divine perfections are exhibited to 
the believing mind, that mind perceives ai^)bject 
every way calculated, on account of its own excel- 
lence, to command the affection and admiration of 
all intelligent creatures : but these intelligent crea- 
tures perceive at the same time, that this supremely 
excellent Being first loved them, and that to love 
him is to be happy. They therefore love him be- 
cause he first loved them ; and also love him under 
an expectation of being happy in the enjoyment of 
him forever : unless they absurdly suppose that He 
will make those, who love him with all their heart, 
eternally miserable. And what an erroneous view 
would this be of his just and merciful character ? 

So also in respect to the second table of the law : 
— Those who love their neighbour as themselves, 
will feel disposed to do him all the good in their 
power, whether they receive any reward from him 
or not : but if their judgment is accurately informed 
they must know that while they continue to love 
their neighbour, this love springing from the love of 
God J that their own happiness is perfectly secure. 



ON CHKIiTIAN BENEVOLENCE. 293 

They cannot, therefore, Love, either God or man, 
or both together, under an expectation of being 
miserable ; and neither are they required to feci 
that disinterested love which would make them 
willing to be miserable while thus filled with divine 
love ; unless we suppose them to be willing to be 
what God is not willing they should be, that is, io 
be opposed to God's will out of love to him ! 

This appears to us a scriptural and rational rep- 
resentation of this subject. And I believe it will be 
extremely difficult to perceive how it can be fairly 
infered that Christians, while acting under the influ- 
ence of such a principle, can be considered as "bot- 
toming their religious experience u])on selfishness." 
The foundation is the love of God : the superstruc- 
ture is the love of our neighbour : and the Chris- 
tian himself while occupying this sacred edifice, 
feels perfectly secure let the wind blow ever so fu- 
riously, or the rain beat ever so vehemently : and as 
long as he possesses a proper regard for his own 
happiness, he will not exchange this divine build- 
ing, for the imaginary shelter of disinterested be- 
nevolence. May we all abide under its gilded roof, 
until we are removed to lh?ii Citi^ which hath foun- 
dation^^ whose maker and builder is God ! 



Bb2 



294 REMARKS ON THE 

CHAPTER VIII. 

Remarks on the Gospel Ministry, 

On this subject we have not much to say in re- 
ply to Mr. Williston's observations on Satan's trans- 
formation, nor to his reiterated insinuation that we 
are Satan's ministers 5 because such invidious com- 
parisons and allusions as go to fix this black 
mark exclusively upon any body of professed Chris- 
tian ministers, are not the best calculated to do 
good. 

However desirable it might be to vindicate our- 
selves from the contemptuous epithets of those who 
think themselves authorized to impugn our motives, 
and to traduce our practice and character, this is a 
consideration of minor importance, when put in 
competition with the immaculate character of the 
God w^e worship. Mr. W. says, somewhat sarcas- 
tically, when speaking of our using the weapon of 
reason in defending what we consider the truth, 
" Now they display great zeal for the honour of 
God." Far from thinking ourselves degraded by 
this remark, we consider it no small honour, unwor- 
thy as we are, to exemplify a suitable zeal in vin- 
dicating the sacred honour of that God, whose im- 
partial goodness has led him to do so much for us, 
^ If these should hold their peace,' said Christ, ' the 
very stones would cry out.' And if we, who are 
iio much indebted to boundless mercy for all the 
good we have, should hold our peace, while others 
are representing our God like a merciless Moloch, 
tormenting thousands in hell fire for ever, for hav- 
ing fulfilled his good pleasure, would not the stony 
Jiearts of infidels cry out against us, and echo the 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 295 

found of their ancestors, who traduced Chris- 
tianity as a system of cruelty ? 

St. Paul said, For -whether we he beside ourselves 
it is to God } or whether we be sober, it is for your 
cause. And if we appear to be beside ourselves^ 
while carried along in the flowing current of rational 
argument, in repelling the unreasonable charges of 
our opponents against our God, and while attempt- 
ing to vindicate his glorious majesty from, what we 
consider, their unscriptural imputations, it is, we 
humbly trust, from no ebulition of intemperate zeal^ 
against the persons of our antagonists ; but from a 
sober concern for immortal souls, which, we fear, 
will be ruined by the principles we oppose ; and, 
however mistaken we may be, from a sincere desire 
to present the Father of our spirits in the amiable 
character in which He appears, encircled with the 
refulgent rays of untarnished justice, infinite wis- 
dom and power, universal love and goodness. So 
far from feeling convicted for displaying too much 
zeal in this sacred cause, we blush to think it has 
not been more proportionate to the tremendous im- 
portance of the cause itself. 

Let then the consideration of our own insignifi- 
cant characters, give place to Him who has 
manifested, and still demonstrates so much love to 
us. In vindication of his adored Majesty, we would, 
were we possessed of the rare talent, exhaust all 
the powers of eloquence. We would not only as- 
cend the lofty mountain of divine revelation, and 
support His aspersed character by the flowing elo- 
quence of the *eraphic Isaiah, the mournful and 
pathetic numbers of Jeremiah, the pious and de- 
vout aspirations of David and his poetical associ- 
ates, the divinely simple and dignified sentences of 
Him who spoke as never man spake, the thundering 
denunciations of Peter, the sententious aphorisms, 
and persuasive words of the beloved disciple John, 



296 REMARKS ON THE 

and the acute, the penetrating, and the rnanly ar- 
guments of Paul — 1 say, we would not only shelter 
ourselves under t|ie wing of these inspired prophets 
and apostles, while they lend us of their plumage to 
decorate the character of our God — but we would 
also range through the spacious field of reason, and 
gather all the blooming flowers of rational argu- 
ment, laying them under conlribution for the sup- 
port of so sacred a cause. But alas ! Our limited 
powers circumscribe us. Were we able to travel 
the whole circle of science, guided continually by 
those infallible data which limit our researches, 
and employ all the treasures of human eloquence 
in evolving and illustrating the attributes of our 
God, we could not present so fair and so lovely 
a portrait as is contained in this one sentence — 
God is love. O John ! What did thy soul feel 
when thou didst utter that divine sentence ? Were 
not all thy powers absorbed in the contempla- 
tion of Him, of whom thou didst say, ' Hereint 
is love, not that we loved him ; but that he loved 
us, and gave his Son to die for us** ? 

While we think ourselves authorized to employ 
every lawful weapon in defence of him who is love, 
and to refute every principle which strikes at the 
root of that essential property of his nature, we 
wish our readers to distinguish between the men 
whose^system we oppose, and their arguments. Al- 
though, from a conviction of the erroneousness of 
their system, we feel excited by the influence of 
truth to show it no mercy, we would in the mean 
time, show all due respect to its advocates. If at 
any time, from a fond attachment to their favourite 
theory, they sufier their judgments to b^ biased 
against the light of scriptural and rational evidence, 
we hope that time, and mature deliberation, may 
rectify their mistakes. This done, they will gladly 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 297 

follow the pure current of gospel truth, and unite 
with us, in ascribing righteousness to our Maker, 

To prevent, however, any one from concluding 
that instead of unfolding the character of God as it 
is, we have been influenced by the subtility of Sa- 
tan, to represent it in an erroneous point of light, 
we shall proceed to make a few remarks upon a sub- 
ject, which, from the manner in which it must be 
handled, is peculiarly disagreeable ; because, it is im- 
possible to meet the observations of our antagonist, 
without interweaving remarks which must have a 
personal bearing, either upon ourselves, or upon 
our opponents. 

When Mr. W* published his sermons, he publish- 
ed one on Satan's transforming himself into an an- 
gel of light, in which, it is very manifest, he design- 
ed to represent the Methodist ministry as the minis- 
try of Satan. While animadverting upon this sermon, 
I endeavoured to vindicate our ministry from the de- 
grading charge ; and also to show, that if promul- 
gating erroneous doctrines were any proof of Satan's 
ministry, then Mr. W. and all who propagated the 
same sentiments, (I mean those by which his system 
is distinguished from others,) and were pursuing sim- 
ilar means against their antagonists, furnished sub- 
stantial proof: at the same time 1 was careful to 
advertise the reader, that 1 did not design those re- 
marks to apply to all ministers of that order, nor to 
insinuate that my antagonist was a wicked minister 
of Satan. See p. 263 of my book. 

Although of the same opinion yet, that the dis- 
ting7(ishing traits of Hopkinsianism are perfectly co- 
incident to the suggestions of Satan, perfectly con- 
genial to the depraved hearts of sinners, and a mo§t 
ejQfectual engine to promote the kingdom of darkness, 
yet I regret that 1 took the least notice of that par- 
ticular sermon — not indeed because I am conscious 
of having written any thing too severe against my op- 



98 KEMAKKS O?? THE 



ponent, nor loo flattering of the Methodist ministry 
- — but 1. Because the erronedusness of his peculiar 
tenets had been sufficiently exposed : 2. IBecause 
I think such invidious remarks as he had made 
were too contemptible to merit any reply: and 3. 
Because we have no apprehension that our minis- 
try will suffer any diminution of its character, 
where we are known, by such degrading insinua- 
ions. Therefore, I think it would have been more 
])rudent to have submitted in silence, rather than to 
have descended to repel such ungenerous attempts 
to pour contempt upon us. We are public charac- 
ters ; and therefore, after presenting to the public 
our doctrines, and submitting them to its candid in- 
spection, if we cannot evince the sincerity of our 
profession^ and the purity of our motives by our 
conduct, we certainly cannot maintain our ground 
by argumentation. And if such calumnious at- 
tempts to class us under the Prince of darkness will 
^pset us, the sooner we are prostrated the better. 
And' were the most elaborate and eloquent speech- 
es employed in our vindication, yet if our doctrines 
were proved erroneous, and our conduct justly 
reprehensible, we could have no scriptural claim to 
the character of Christian ministers. 

Neither would any farther remarks be now made 
upon this exclusive claim made by our opponent, 
were it not for the purpose of correcting some mis- 
takes which have a bearing upon our views of a gos- 
pel ministry, and of removiiig some wrong impres- 
sions which, otherwise, m.ay be made by Mr. W.'s 
method of defence. 

" As to the sarcastic remarks, says he, which are 
contained in this, and indeed in all the letters, I 
have nothing to do with them." p. 179. It is ac- 
knowledged that there are some sarcastic remarks 
in the letters, and particularly in the one under con- 
gideratlon \ and I feel myself perfectly justified in 



GOSPEL MTNTSTRT. 299 

the use of them. What else can be done with pal- 
pable absurdities, than to hold them upas just ob* 
jects of ridicule ? And in retorting a charge, made 
with so mucb seriousness, that we are ministers of 
Satan, must the salt of irony be considered as the 
gall of bitterness? If the weapon he designed to 
chastise his neighbour with, be wrested from him, 
and the cutting strokes returned upon the back of 
his own absurd system, are v^e criminal for follow- 
ing the example of a deeply pious man in his mode 
of polemical discussion ? And so far as the absurd- 
ities of his doctrines, the many palpable contra- 
dictions which present themselves upon the very 
face of them, are concerned, how shall they be ex- 
posed ? To refute them by argument is impossible. 
If a man were to affirm that God hates sin, and that 
it is according to his pleasure, because his own pro^ 
(luctioji, though it originales from the heart of man ; 
]jow are you to reason against such absurd proposi- 
tions ? To let them pass unnoticed would betray a 
want of zeal in the cause of truth. And to disprove 
every absurdity by direct scripture testimony, is 
not always practicable : for if a man were to as- 
sert that God originally decreed the everlasting 
destruction of a precise number of the human fam- 
ily, all of which must inevitably be damned ; and 
then assert that those identical reprobates were 
})ut into a salvable state, so that they may be sav- 
ed if ihey will, because Christ died for them with- 
out any intention of saving them ; how will you 
disprove his contradictory assertions by positive 
scripture testimony, or refute them by rational ar- 
gument? And the reason is obvious enough. The 
assertions are so manifestly absurd, and so com- 
pletely incompatible with each other, that they 
nood only to be mentioned to render them incredi- 
ble. 



500 REMARKS ON THE 

But our pious antagonist writes with much appa- 
rent candour, and Christian gravity, professing a 
great love for my soul, and a great concern for my 
personal salvation, and the salvation of the Metho- 
dist people. How far such apparent candour, and 
such professions of love for another are consistent 
with the manner in which he has stated our doctrines, 
and which has been noticed in the preceeding pa- 
ges, the reader must determine. Exit, says he, 
" I have no personal quarrel with my antagonist, p. 
179. A good reason for it. His antagonist has 
done him no personal injustice, neither has he 
brought any false accusations against his system. 
This, however, he assigns as a reason why he has 
nothing to do with my sarcasms, that is, I suppose 
he will not retaliate with similar weapons. But we 
think a better reason may be assigned. 

The fact is, that in the true doctrines of the gos- 
pel, there is nothing ridiculous ; so that a man must 
be abandoned indeed, like the infidel philosopher, 
Voltaire, to employ sarcasm against these sublime 
truths. Where is the man that will have the ef- 
frontery to pour forth irony or sarcasm, upon the 
doctrine of Human depravity : The universal 
atonement of Christ: The necessity of Justification 
by faith : Repentance, holiness, and Christian obe- 
dience to the end of life : The justice, wisdom, pow- 
er, goodness, and holiness of God, which shine, 
when the mists of error are cleared away, with 
transcendent beauty and excellence in the charac- 
ter of Him, who is worshiped by those who embrace 
the truth as it is in Jesus ? 

We do not find that the false Prophets ever em- 
ployed ridicule or sarcasm against the true God, or 
against the true Prophets of Israel ; but we find the 
latter frequently exposing the absurdities of the 
false gods, and the nonsensical reveries of the 
false prophets, ty their innocent sallies of irony. 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 301 

Take a few instances of it. ' Ye have forsaken 
me, and served other gods : wherefore 1 will deliver 
you no more. Go, and cry unto the gods ye have 
chosen ; let them deliver you in the time of your 
tribulation.' Judges x. 14. ' And it came to pass 
at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, cry 
aloud : for he is a god ; either he is talking, or he 
is pursuing, or he is on a journey, or peradventure 
he sleepeth, and must be awaked.' 1 Kings xviii, 
27. How cutting this keen satire upon these proph- 
ets of Baal, who were contesting the point with 
Elijah the true Prophet of Israel respecting the true 
God. So Job also, while refuting the inconclusive 
reasoning of his mistaken friends, uttered the follow- 
ing severe irony — ' No doubt ye are the people, and 
wisdom shall die with you.' Job xii. 2. And did 
not Jesus Christ use a similar figure of speech when 
he gently reproved his disciples on account of their 
inattention to the tremendous suflerings he was 
preparing to meet ? ' Sleep on now, and take your 
rest : behold the hour is at hand, and the Son of man 
is betrayed into the hands of sinners.' Matt. xxvi. 
45. That he did not design they should sleep on 
is manifest from the next verse where it is said, 
* Rise, I'i't us be going.' ' This weapon,' says Dr. 
Reid, ' when properly applied, cuts with as keen an 
edge as argument. Nature has furnished us with 
the first to expose absurdity ; as with the last to 
refute error. Both are well fitted for their seve- 
ral offices, and are friendly to truth when properly 
applied.' Sheltered then, under the wing of inspi- 
ration, and screened by the wall of a sound philoso- 
phy, I hope 1 may not be hastily condemned for 
presuming to apply the razor of satire to some of 
the oftensive limbs of the Hopkinsian image. 

The reason why ihe false prophets did not retal- 
iate upon the prophets of God, in the use of their 
own weapon, is very obvious. In the sacred char- 

c c 



302 REMARKS ON THE 

acter of the true God, there was every thing cal- 
culated to inspire lowly reverence, and profound 
respect, and nothing to excite a spirit of ridicule : 
but in the character of the heathen idols, (that is 
nothings,) and in the conduct of their votaries, there 
were an abundance of things ridiculous in them- 
selves ', and hence they were treated with merited 
contempt. Thus much for an apology. Perhaps 
I may have indulged in the use of this weapon 
more than I ought— for every such offence, I ask 
the reader's pardon- — but I candidly think, that 
many of Mr. W's positions are perfectly ridiculous 
in themselves, and therefore merit not a serious re- 
futation. 

But though Mr. W. has no " personal quarrel" 
with the Author of the Letters^ he nevertheless, 
with great gravity, endeavours from p. 186 to 189, 
to clothe us with the transforming robe of Satan, 
and to class us with his ministers* 

It appears always to have been the master-piece 
of Satan's subtilty, in imposing upon mankind, to 
blend truth and falsehood together. " Let us sup- 
pose," says this grave defender of reformed doc- 
trines, " for a moment, that a precise number were 
given to him, (that is to Christ) as the reward of his 
sufferings, and that all this number wilf, through 
grace, come to him and be saved ; and in connex- 
ion with this, let us suppose that one of the pro- 
fessed teachers of his religion should say, * This is 
one of the most shocking ideas that can enter into 
the heart of man' ; would Christ own such a man, 
as one of his ministers?" p. 187. This quotation 
is not introduced with any view directly to vindi- 
cate myself from the very charitable insinuation of 
our gTave antagonist that I am a minister of Satan ; 
but it is done principally with a design to detect an 
erroneous view of what T had said respecting the 
** shocking idea." He here represents me as say- 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 303 

ing, that it is *' one of the most shocking ideas that 
can enter into the heart of man," that one of those 
who he supposes was eternally and uncondidon- 
ally elected, would never so fall away as to perish ; 
but we shall soon see how artfully truth and error 
are blended together in this representation. 

In his sermon on Election and Reprobation, p. 
57. he had asserted that God had determined be- 
fore Esau was born that he should be a " vessel of 
wrath fitted to destruction''" — and this was the idea 
Avhich 1 said was one of the most shocking which 
the heart of man could conceive — and not because 
some were chosen in Christ, who must inevitably 
be saved. The doctrine of Election and infallible 
perseverance, did it not involve the doctrine of un- 
conditional reprobation and infallible perseverance 
in wickedness, might be borne with : but it is that 
dreadful counterpart of Ilopkinsianism, which de- 
clares, according to the above assertion of Mr. W. 
that myriads of unborn souls are consigned to the 
regions of eternal woe, and that unconditionally 
and infallibly, without any respect to their wicked 
works foreseen, that we consider so shocking to a 
benevolent mind. Some have doubtetl whether 
our antagonists do hold to such a sentiment, name- 
ly, that God brings some beings into existence on 
purpose to damn them eternally ; but the question 
is removed beyond all doubt by the above bare- 
faced assertion of the vindicator of reformed doc- 
trine?. ' 

Whether it is characteristic of a minister of Sa- 
tan to misrepresent the doctrine of an antagonist 
for the purpose of prostrating his opposers, I shall 
not take upon me to determine. But that Mr. W. 
has, in several instances, distorted our doctrine, 
thereby defacing the lovely image of truth which 
we defend, I believe will be evident to all who 
consult the preceding pages. How far he may 



304 REMARKS ON THE 

have been unintentionally betrayed intq this un- 
fortunate method of defence, by the heat of con- 
troversial zeal, and by a fond attachment to a fa- 
vourite theory, must be determined by his own de- 
liberate judgment. Without assuming the office of 
a judge in respect to his motive, or the cause of his 
mistakes, I only have to lament that such a system 
should ever have floated upon the surface of the hu- 
man mind, as should raise such a thick mist as to 
bewilder its friends into such mistaken views of di- 
vine truth, and such censorious views of the char- 
acter of their antagonists ; for while Mr. Ws great 
gravity will not allow him to indulge in an inno- 
cent irony, and his great candour forbids his mis- 
representing his opponent, and his ardent charity 
prompts him greatly to desire my salvation, he 
nevertheless thinks most candidly that, if I am not 
eternally repr^obated, I am yet in a s/a^e of repro- 
bation ; for he says, " that if we do not love them,^^ 
(that is his peculiar doctrines) " it is because we are 
in a state of unregeneracy'^'' — and this remark he 
considered of " such great importance that he dare 
not omit it." p. 239. 

Neither %viU we affirm positively that his deter- 
mined opposition to Gospel holiness or Christian 
perfection, (so strongly insisted upon in the sacred 
scriptures,(.and his ardent wish " to drive the direct 
witness of the Spirit out of the world," are infalli- 
ble marks of a minister of Satan : We would rather 
impute this extreme desire to exterminate this love- 
ly tree of Paradise from the garden of the Lord, 
and his great solicitude to retain and to partake 
of the tree of knowledge of good and^ evil^ which 
he insists must be the portion of all Christians 
while they live — (for notwithstanding he says p. 
118, that "The scriptures have not furnished us 
with any such compound terms, to distinguish such 
as have some holiness mixed with some sin, some 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 305 

wisdom with some folly," he yet manifests an ex- 
treme attachment to this mixed tree, which bears 
*' some holiness and some sin," so strikingly re- 
sembling that fatal tree of Paradise of which our 
first parents partook) — I say we would rather im- 
pute his strong attachment to this mixed state to 
the influence of that entwining serpent error ^ from 
whose influence even good men, and especially 
those who have only " some good mixed with some 
eviP'* are not always exempted. Why should we 
impugn the motives of our antagonist? Is it not 
possible for a candid man to be so far imposed up- 
on by the illusive influence of error, and so far 
blinded by prejudice, as to think he is doing God 
service, while he opposes some important truths of 
God's word ? All we wish, at present, is, that our 
readers may beware how they mistake this com- 
pound tree of good and evil which Mr. W. has re- 
commended to the world, as the most eft'ectual 
means of making one wise unto salvation, for that 
ever blooming tree of life which the Lord God hath 
planted in his holy garden, the church, the doctri- 
nal leaves of which are for the healing of the na- 
tions. The fruit of this tree is pure and good, and 
those who eat continually thereof shall live for ever. 
One more mistake 1 wish to rectify, — and O that 
it might be the last — for it is an irksome task to 
be reduced to the necessity of dwelling so much up- 
on the infirmities of our fellow creatures. Mr. W. 
says p. 185, "Soundness of doctrine is essential to 
the ministers of Christ." This we grant. And is 
not therefore wusoundness of doctrine essential to 
a minister of Satan ? But he makes this declaration 
in connexion with a paragra|}h in which he notices 
my concluding remarks, where it is said, ' Did 
we refuse to preach, until the people had stipulated 
to give us three, five, ten, or twenty hundred dol- 
lars annually, there might be some cause to sus- 

c c 3 



306 REMARKS ON THE 

pect we were actuated by sinister motives, and that 
our ministry was founded in selfishness ;' and he la- 
bours much to show, what 1 never controverted, that 
" receiving a salary is no mark of a minister of Sa- 
tan." His remarks upon this part of our subject 
would induce a belief that I had made this the only 
criterion of Satan's ministers : whereas I never said 
that it was any characteristic at all. I said, if we 
refused to preach until the people had stipulated to 
give us, &c. there might be some cause to suspect, 
&c. The old proverb is, Hit the bird and the fea- 
thers will fly. I had previously exhibited our doc- 
trines, contrasting them with the distiyiguishing 
traits of Hopkinsianism, as an evidence of our be- 
ing called of God ; and also adverted to the ex* 
perience and gospel labours of the Methodists minis- 
try as an evidence of the purity of their faith, and 
of their benevolent designs : but all this is passed 
over in silence by our candid disputant, fixing his 
attention upon a concluding reniark upon which 
no particular stress was laid. 

In respect to this particular, we may observe, that 
although the apostle Paul vindicated the claim of 
the ministers of the Lord Jesus to a competent sup- 
port from those with whom they laboured in the 
Lord, thereby showing that all such ministers are 
entitled to such pecuniary support, yet we have no 
account that, previous to his entering on his minis- 
terial labours, he stipulated w'nh the people for a 
specific amount. The primitive preachers and 
Evangelists, having received a commission from 
their Lord, it was woe to them, whatever temporal 
sacrifices they might be called to make in conse- 
quence of obeying their divine call, if they preach- 
ed not the gospel. If the people, who were blessed 
with their ministry, were negligent in communi- 
cating to their temporal wants, the sin lay at theiy 
door. We have no doubt, and our practice con- 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 307 

firms the observation, but that it is the imperious 
duty of the people to see that their ministers are 
comfortably supported : and those people who 
through inattention, or penuriousness, allow their 
miifiisters to suffer on account of poverty, are, we 
believe, highly culpable in the sight of God, But 
this neglect on the part of the people, is not suffi- 
cient to excuse a minister of God, if he hold his 
peace. Having received a commission from God 
to proclaim salvation in the name of Jesus Christ, 
he must persevere in the discharge of his highly 
responsible office, whether the people will hear or 
forbear, support or not support. Let him consci- 
entiously discharge his duty, clear his skirts ; and 
if the people presume to rob him of his just demand, 
let them answer it at the tremenduous day of reck- 
oning. 

But it is a little extraordinary that Mr. W. should 
fix his attention upon this article alone, as though 
we did not consider " soundness of doctrine essen- 
tial" to a gospel ministry ; especially as 1 had pre- 
viously mentioned this, and had exhibited our doC' 
trines, experience, ^nd practice, to prove that we be- 
lievedy experienced, and laboriously taught the truth. 
Afier evincing that Mr. VV.'s system, so far as it 
refered all sin to God as i[s efficient cause, plead for 
sin in the heart and life as long as we live, &c. 
was in perfect conformity to what Satan has all 
along taught, it was observed, p. !289 — ' Whether 
our doctrines are such as deserve to be ranked 
among the doctrines of Satan or not, the intelligent 
reader who has consulted them, must determine.' 
Then our leading doctrines were stated, which were 
in substance as follows; — 1. * God governs the 
world in wisdom, juslicc and goodness, so that sin 
is n^ produced by him.' 2. ' Man was created 
holy!' 3. * He unnecessarily sinned, and plunged 
himself and all his posterity into misery.' 4. ' To 



308 REMARKS ON THE 

rescue man from this deplorable condition, Jesus 
Christ undertook his cause, and made a complete 
atonement for the sin of the whole world.' 5. 'Those 
therefore who are finally reprobated, are repro- 
bated because they voluntarily reject the offers of 
pardon and salvation.' 6. * Man has nothing good 
3n him by nature.' 7. ' The doctrine of election 
which we teach is founded in the unbounded good- 
ness of God.' 8. ' Salvation is of grace through 
faith in the Lord Jesus.' 9. 'Justified believers 
must continually grow in grace and in the knowledge 
of Jesus Christ,'' 10. 'In order to this, they 
must watch and pray, and live by faith in the Son of 
God.' 11. 'And persevering in holiness, they 
should be eternally saved.' Then it was asked, 
• Is this the doctrine of Satan P See p,.^289— 291 of 
the Errors, &;c. 

Was there, then, any just reason for Mr. W. to 
intimate that we were indifferent respecting doc- 
trine ; or that we did not consider purity of doc- 
trines essential to a gospel ministry ? Why then 
have we taken so much pains to clear away the rub- 
ish of Hopkinsian absurdities, that we might ex- 
hibit that sacred edifice of scripture doctrine, which 
was erected by inspired Prophets and Apostles, 
Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone? 
Or wall he undertake to prove that the above doc- 
trines are the doctrines of Satan ? We think this 
would cost him more time and labour than he has to 
spare. Let him, indeed, dress us in the coat of 
Pelagius, and cover us with the flowing robe of 
the Pharisees, and paint our face with the offensive 
colouring of merit-mongers, ' and he may make us 
appear as ugly and as black as Satan himself: but 
the sponge of truth will easily rub off the artificial^ 
colouring, and the kind hand of candour will gently 
pull off those foreign and borrowed robes, so that 
we may be exhibited in the seamless robe of right- 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 309 

eousness which we have received from the Lord 
Jesus, and with our face washed in the pure water 
issuing from the Throne of God and the Lamb* 
But if our disputant think himself competent to 
prove that the above doctrines belong to Satan, 
if he publish again, let him dip his pen m the foun- 
tain of eternal truth, and then, if he can, shew the 
coincidence of any one of those trutlis to the blas- 
phemous errors of Satan. He may hnd Satan's 
suggestions in a variety of places in scripture. 

He says p. 1 82. " The things, which Mr. B. 
has said in favour of their ministers will not prove 
with certainty, that they are not the ministers of 
Satan transformed into the apostles of Christ." 
Now what are the things which I have said in fa- 
vour of the Methodist ministry ? I endeavoured to 
prove, 

1. That they had an experimental knowledge of 
Jesus Christ ; or in other words, That they gave 
evidence that they were horn of God, by the righte- 
ousness of their lives. And it is well known to all 
who are acquainted with our spiritual economy, that 
none are admitted into the ministry until we have 
satisfactory evidence of their union with God 
through faith in the Lord Jesus. Hence it is said 
respecting those who think they are called of God 
to this sacred employment ; ' Do they know God as 
a pardoning God? Have they the love of God 
abiding in them ? Do they desire and seek nothing 
but God ? And are they holy in all manner of con- 
versation ?' Discipline p. 29. 14th Ed. I would 
ask any reasonable Christian, whether he supposes 
a J\] mister of Salem, knozvs God as a pardoning God, 
so that the love of God dwells in kim. and which 
is exemplified by being holy in all manner of con- 
zcrsation ? And let it be remembered that the truth 
of this is not merely tested by the bare profession 
of the candidate \ but he must furnish substantial 



310 REMARKS ON THE 

proof from a previous trial in the Church as a mem- 
ber, as an exhorter, and then as a local preacher; 
in all which relations he must exhibit those tempers 
and conduct which are compatible with the doc- 
trines, precepts, and spirit of the Gospel. But he 
must also shew that^he has * gifts (as well as grace) 
for the work. ' Have they' (it is also asked) ' a clear, 
sound understanding, a right judgment in the things 
of God, a just conception of salvation by faith ? And 
has God given them any degree of utterance ? Do 
they speak justly, readily, clearly? Have they fruit? 
Are any truly convinced of sin, and converted to 
God, by their preaching ? As long as these three 
marks concur in any one, we believe he is called of 
God to preach' : ibid. 

It should be remarked that these evidences are 
i-equired before he is received into the itinerating 
ministry — after which he is on trial two years be- 
fore he is admitted as a member of an Annual Con- 
ference — during which time, if he is found deficient, 
either in experience, doctrine, or practice, gifts, 
grace, or usefulness, he is dismissed from the min- 
istry. 

2. I endeavoured secondly^ to evince that our 
ministry were sound in doctrine. What those doc- 
trines are may be seen above. If any of them can 
be proved false, or congenial to the suggestions of 
Satan, we will then review our ground, and ac- 
knowledge our mistake. 

3. It was shewn from the manner in which we 
laboured in the gospel field, that it was hardly pos- 
sible to be actuated by mercenary motives. And 
if any doubt on this subject, the most effectual way 
to remove their scepticism will be, to forsake their 
domestic, or parish life, and enter the ranks with us, 
follow our steps, ' o'er hill and dale,' and refuse 
to receive any more pecuniary reward than we do. 
We dQ not say, indeed, that this is an infallihU 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 311 

jDroof that none are actuated by selfish views ; for 
how far Satan may influence a novice to impose 
upon himself and others, in order to reproach the 
cause of Christ, we presume net to determine ; but 
thus much we say, that a man must be the merest no- 
vice in the universe, to associate himself to the Me- 
thodist ministry from a view to fame, honour ease, 
or temporal aggrandizement : if he have no other re- 
proach, he will have the honour of being classed, by 
some rigid Hopkinsians, with the minions of Satan. 
We moreover say, that under such circumstances, it 
seems very unlikely that any man should long con- 
tinue in a course of life which must disappoint all 
his expectations ; especially when he must know 
that the very moment he is detected, he must be 
disgraced, by a removal from his office. 

4. It was evinced that a righteous life Is essen- 
tially necessary to entitle a man to a seat among us. 
Neither is this ever dispensed with on any occa- 
sion. 

Now, pray tell us, ye ministerial casuists, If a 
man can know God as a pardoning God, can have 
the Holy Spirit dwell in his heart, can have a clear 
perception of salvation by faith, a clear, sound un- 
derstanding in the things of God, be orthodox in 
the doctrines of the gospel, be conscientiously dil- 
igent in the discharge of his ministerial duties, and 
exemplify in his life the righteous precepts of the 
gospel, — and yet be a minister of Satan? If he 
can, we should be glad to know the discriminating 
marks of a minister of the Lord Jesus ? Must he, 
in addition to these things, be a presbyterian ? or 
■ must he bonafide hold to unconditional predestina- 
tion, and preach that God is the efficient cause of 
sin. If, indeed, the rejecting these points be char- 
acteristic of Satan's ministers, then we acknowledge 
we are his vassals, and shall rejoice in bearing the 
reproach while we live. But we know of no place 



812 REMARKS ON THE 

in the Holy Scriptures where the ministers of God 
are commanded to preach that doctrine ; unless 
Markxvi. 16. can be made to mean that — ' Preach 
the Gospel to every creature ! 

But I beg leave here to declare, once for all, that 
'SO far as the Hopkinsians, Methodists, or whoever 
they may be, are not experimentally acquainted with 
the grand doctrines of the gospel j so far as they ei- 
ther directly or indirectly charge The holy One of 
Israel with having ordained, and as now influenc- 
ing men to sin \ represent Him as damning the rep- 
robates for fufilling his decree in all they do ; for 
not believing in Christ to the salvation of their, souls, 
when he never intended to save them though he 
died for them ; say that, though they were uncon- 
ditionally doomed to destruction, they are yet in a 
salvable state ; declare that we must live in sin 
every moment of our lives, and that pride, hard- 
ness of heart, blindness of mind, he. are produc- 
tive of humility, he, plead that sin works for our 
good ; deny the necessity of justification by faith 
in Christ, and holiness of heart ; and say that all 
the abominations of mankind are not only pleasing 
to the Almighty, but are produced by Him ; so far. 
as any professed ministers are wanting in this gos- 
pel experience, and so far as they propogate these 
most destructive sentiments, it is our deliberate 
judgment, that they do, in the most effectual man- 
ner, subserve the cause of Satan. Such sentiments 
strike most directly at the root of all the Divine 
perfections, sully the glory of hia adorable attri- 
butes, falsify his word, undermine the grand sys- 
tem of salvation by grace, transfer the responsibil- 
ity of all human and diabolical agents to God, arid 
endanger the present and eternal salvation of men* 

Gn the other hand, those who leave these offen- 
sive traits of Hopkinsian divinity out of the ques- 
tion, (though they^may hold to them in theory,) 



OOSPEL MINISTRY. 31S 

ind preach those distinguishing doctrines of the 
gospel, namely, The holiness, wisdom, justice, pow- 
er, and goodness of God ; human depravity ; the 
atonement of Christ; repentance ; justification by 
faith in Christ; holiness of heart and life; and all 
those truths necessarily connected with these : — » 
Those who do this, by whatever name they may 
be distinguished — and do it from an inward cx/)e* 
rience of the saving efficacy of Jesus' blood — we 
fully believe they are the ministers of the Lord Je- 
sus — and are the honoured instruments. of promot- 
ing his cause among men. Hence w^e have no 
doubt but I hat there are those among the Calvin- 
ists and Hopkinsians, whose hearts glow with love 
to God, and an ardent desire for the salvation of 
their fellow men : The prejudice of education may 
prevent their perceiving the fatal tendency of their 
system, and thinking it true, they may deem it 
their duty to defend it. How far the Lord who is 
gracious and merciful^ may make allowance for 
mental errors, arising from youthful prejudice, or 
unavoidable ignorance, is not for us to say. But 
while we make this acknowledgment, we mean to 
be understood as speaking of those who do not ob- 
stinately shut their eyes against the light of truth, 
and who do not pertinaciously contend v.ith others 
by distorting and mangling their sentiments for the 
purpose of obtaining an argumentative conquest : 
neither do we mean to say, that we believe God 
ever blesses the preaching of those parts of their 
system which we have considered as such danger- 
ous errors. To the feet of all such, who believe, 
experience, and teach those glorious doctrines of 
the gospel above mentioned, by whatever name 
they may be distinguished, would we gladly sit, 
and be instructed; and cordially unite in the har- 
mony of the gospel, in proclaiming salvation to a 
lost world. 

D d 



314 REMARKS ON THE 

How far the experience and practice of all my 
brethren in the ministry, under the name of Me- 
thodists, may correspond to the truths ihey pro- 
fess to believe and teach, is not for me to say. — 
We know, however, that it is very possible to hold 
to the truth in unrighteousness. It is one thing 
to believe upon given evidence of the truth, and 
another to experience and practise in conformity 
to it. Though erudition and human science are 
ornaments and qualifications greatly to be desired 
by all public teachers, yet ail the merely human 
learning in the world, — even if we were masters of 
the whole circle of the sciences, — yet if we were 
destitute of a saving knowledge of God in Christ, 
if destitute of the internal energies of the Holy 
Spirit, we are unfit for the sacred work of the min- 
istry. Let it not, however, be understood, that we 
contemn, or undervalue scienlifical attainments. 
No ; we consider them, next to the enlightening and 
sanctifying influence of the' Holy Spirit upon the 
heart, among the greatest helps to a right under- 
standing, and a clear explication of God's sacred 
word. If God, therefore, see fit to call men with 
these human embellishments, or if they have op- 
portunity after having entered upon the important 
work, to acquire them, let them neither be under- 
valued nor overated, but estimated according to 
their intrinsic worth, as most desirable auxiliaries 
to a minister of the Lord Jesus. 

But soundness of doctrine, purity of experience, 
motive and conduct, a conscientious observance of 
every precept of the holy Gospel, and an active 
diligence in the pursuit of divine knowledge, as 
well as a laborious perseverance in search of lost 
souls, we consider among the grand characteristics 
of an ambassador of heaven. Such a man, clothed 
with authority from the Sovereign of heaven and 
e^rth, will furnish more than human credentials that 



GOSPEL MINISTRY. 315 

he is sent of God to seek after the lost sheep of the 
house of Israel. His word will be anointed with 
the holy unction ; and when he speaks in the name 
of his Sovereign, divine authority attends the word, 
and the hearts of his audience are made to tremble, 
while he announces in their ears the awful thunders 
of Sinai ; and the desponding mourner looks up 
with reviving hope, and reclining faith, while this 
messenger of the skies exhibits the peculiar glories 
of the God-Man, and pours forth the consoling 
promises of pardon and salvation, in the name of 
his divine Master : while, with an eloquence which 
could only be inspired from heaven, this man of 
God pourtrays the exalted privilege of perfect love, 
and the indescribable glories of the world to come, 
the happy believer is ravished with supreme de- 
light. Here then is the true minister of the sanc- 
tuary. Adorned with the graces of the Holy Spi- 
rit, penetrating into the sacred mysteries of redemp- 
tion, unfolding with his artless tongue, the wonders 
of redeeming grace, and proclaiming the impartial 
love of God to a ruined world, his listening audi- 
ence is captivated with the charms of divine truth, 
and the glowing ardour of divine love. If human 
science be superadded to his other attainments, he 
shines, indeed, with superior splendour ; but if that 
be all of which he can boast, he is but a sounding 
brass, and a tinkling cymbal, 

Jt is, indeed, to be feared, that there are those 
among ourselves, as well as among others, who, 
either by their ignorance, their indolence, or their^ 
want of experience in divine things ; or by their 
pride, their self conceit, or their self-importance ; 
who may give cause to the enemies of truth to speak 
reproachfully. It is to be hoped, however, that the 
number of such is small; and that if there be anyj 
they may be brought to a better mind. 



J16 KEMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

For my own part, I have embraced the doctrines 
of the Methodists from a conviction of their truth ; 
and adhere to them, and employ my feeble powers 
in their defence, because I fully believe them. And 
I am the more confirmed in this belief, from the 
consideration that our polemical adversaries are 
reduced to the sad necessity of misstating our 
views^before they canenter the field against us, with 
any prospect of success. This, I trust, has been 
fully evinced in the preceding pages. May we so 
read, write, preach and live, as to commend our* 
selves to every maivs conscience in the sight of Gad* 



CHAPTER IX. 

Remarks 07i ^'' nattiral abiliii/'^^ and ^^ moral 
inabiliti/,'^^ 

One of the most convincing evidences of the 
truth of any system is, its exact conformity to the 
moral perfections of God, and its suitableness to 
the moral condition of man. And whenever this is 
perceived in any system, we shall, at the same time, 
perceive a harmony in its several parts, one truth 
growing out of another, and the various branches of 
truth mutually depending upon, and supporting 
each other. And that which recommends Chris- 
tianity to the consideration of intelligent bemgs is, 
that it perspicuously illustrates the divine perfec- 
tions, exhibits the character of man as our daily ex- 
perience proves it to be, adapts itself to our moral 
condition, by the sovereign remedy it has provided 
for our spiritual disease, and by presenting to the 
enlightened mind a harmonious system of doctrines 
and precepts. While, therefore, we contemplate 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 317 

this glorious system, our minds are delighted in be- 
holding, the beauty, order, and sacred harmony, so 
visibly manifested in every part of it. It is like a 
well contrived, and a well finished building in which 
nothing is wanting, nothing superfluous ; so that, 
while we view this sacred edifice, we not only be- 
hold a permanent foundation on which it securely 
rests, but also a superstructure of exquisite work- 
manship, the lovely harmony of the several parts 
in which, mutually supporting and strengthening 
each other, being fitly framed together^ grozccth 
unto an holy temple in the Lord, 

But while we behold this internal evidence of the 
divine authority of the gospel, in the sacred harmo- 
ny and Qxquisite beauty of the Christian building, 
our minds turn with avidity and disgust from the 
hetcrogenius mixture of those materials with which 
the discordant temple of error is composed. How 
much so ever the art and ingenuity of men may dis- 
play themselves, in decorating the external ap- 
pearance of this confused edifice, its internal de- 
Ibrmity, when examined in the light of truth, ex- 
hibits convincing evidence of its human origin, and 
of its defective structure. Instead of beholding that 
ZiQji which is the perfection of beauty, out of which 
God hath shined, we perceive evident marks of that 
gloomy mansion, where the Sun of truth never 
shines but to reveal the rottenness of its foundation, 
and the weakness of its superstructure. 

We shall see, 1 trust, these remarks verified while 
examining Mr. Williston's theory o( natural ability 
and moral inability. It is true, we have not much 
to object to his explanation of his views of this sub- 
ject only as they are connected with other parts of 
his system : for we grant that every sinner " has 
powers and faculties which belong to his nature as 
a rational moral agent, which are sufficient to ena= 
ble him to do all that which he is commanded,'^ 

Dd3 



318 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

p. 230 — But we contend that this is only true 
when the sinner is viewed in relation to the gospel 
representation of Redemption and Salvation, which 
exhibits the ample provision made by Jesus Christ 
for the present and eternal salvation of all man- 
kind ; for no man can have, either natural or moral 
ability, to do an impossibility : but if a part of the 
human family were eternally reprobated, and there- 
by-excluded from any saving benefits of redemp- 
tion, their eternal salvation was absolutely and eter- 
nally impossible. And have these excluded repro- 
bates natural ability to do that which is naturally 
and absolutely impossible ? If their salvation were 
possible^ then the Hopkinsian decree of reprobation 
is a human decree. If it were impossible^ then their 
doctrine of natural ability to love God is worse than 
human. They may extricate themselves from this 
dil6mma in any way their system will admit. If 
they break down the first barrier, they annihilate 
their doctrine of decrees : If the second, they des- 
troy this peculiarity of Hopkinsianism, and confirm 
the doctrine of the old fashioned Calvinists : But if, 
with a bolder flight, they leap over them both, they 
will find themselves happily escaped into the open 
plains of gospel truth, where rivers of divine love 
flow to all the human race, which so washes off the 
defects of natural ability, and supplies by its invigo- 
rating influence, the deficiency of a moral inability^ 
that they mav come to Christ, the flowing fountain of 
eternal life, drink, and live for ever. How absurd it 
is to suppose that a man has natural power to regene- 
rate himself, in direct opposition to his inclination^ 
and to prepare himself, by loving God with all his 
heart, for heaven, when at the same time, Christ 
had no intention oi saving him w^hen he died for him, 
and his eternal damnation was made unalterably 
certain by God's irrevocable decree. Therefore, 
.although it is proper to say that men have physical 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 319 

and m^ral powers to do what God requires of them, 
when enlightened by the Spirit of truth, and when 
comprehended in the grand scheme of redemption ; 
yet, it appears extremely absurd to suppose they 
have natural power to do this in direct opposition 
to the eternal purpose, and the present agency of 
God. This would be to invest man with a power 
to overcome the omnipotent decree of Jehovah, and 
to do that which was rendered absolutely impossi- 
ble by an act of God himself. Does any one perceive 
the beauty of truth in this deformed face of Hopkin- 
sianism ? 

Moreover, it seems unscriplural to suppose that 
men have natural ability to perceive and under- 
stand the way of life and salvation, only as they are 
enlightened by the word and Spirit of God ; for the 
understandings of men are darkened in consequence 
of original depravity, their ears are dull of hearing, 
and they cannot see spiritual objects unless divinq 
illumination is afforded them : how then, can they 
have natural, while they have no moral poiver to 
love God ? We grant, indeed, that all men have suf- 
ficient powers of inind to understand, and to do, 
what God requires them to understand and do, 
when they are enlightened and empowered by grace; 
and that this grace is afforded to all men during 
their probationary stale : but this truth grows out 
of that true proposition of the gospel, (which Hop- 
kinsianism denies in its first principle respecting 
universal decrees,) namely, that Christ, by his 
death and suffering has made salvation possible to 
all men. 1 know, indeed, that Mr. W. has asserted 
that Jesus Christ " has put all men into a salvablc 
state ;" but we also know, that this assertion can 
never be reconciled with his doctrine of an eter- 
nal, definite, and absolute reprobation : and neither 
will his plaster of natural .ability ever heal the 
wound which the keen razor of truth has made in 



S20 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

this limb of his hydra ; it being certain that rjp man 
has natural ability to do that which God, by an im- 
mutable decree, has made impossible to be done. 

But why is this doctrine of natural ability and 
moral inability contended for ? It is, it would ap- 
pear, to vindicate the claims oldivine justice in the 
final and perpetual condemnation of those unhappy 
reprobates, who were eternally condemned in the 
mind of God ; whose inability and ability with all 
their effects and causes are in exact conformity to 
the original intention, and the present existing 
agency of God. But pray tell us, how does this 
vindicate the claims of divine justice ? If the bow 
be bent by the marksman in just such a direction 
as he would have it, so as to answer his purpose 
precisely ; and if from long use, it contract an in- 
clination to that particular direction j is the bow ac- 
countable for not altering its inclination ? So, if the 
hearts of these poor reprobates are inclined by an 
Almighty and effective decree to a particular direc- 
tion, namely, to sin and damnation ; and if they 
perfectly answer ihe mind of God in all they pas- 
sively do, must they be eternally condemned for 
possessing a moral inability to alter their inclina^ 
tion, and turn themselves about, and save them- 
selves contrary to the original design of God ? 
This would seem a hard case indeed. Of what 
use, now, can this new-fangled doctrine of 7iaf«r«/ 
ability, and moral inability be in vindicating the 
justice of God in the condemnation of the repro- 
bates ? It can serve no other purpose than to hide 
the real state of the doctrine for which Mr. W. has 
so zealously contended in the first chapter of his 
book. 

If, however, we search this theory to the bottom, 
we shall find it full of deception. That this may be 
done, we will propound a few questions, subjoining 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 321 

.-^uch answers as the Hopkinsian minister, would, if 
true to his theory, give. 

Q. Do you believe that Jesus Christ tasted death 
for every man ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Did Christ design the reprobates should be 
eternally interested in the merits of his death? 
A. 'No.' 

Q. But are all men put into a sahuhle state ? 
A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Could they have been saved contrary to his 
design ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. How ? A. ' They have natural ahility to break 
God's decree.' 

Q. You believe, then, all may be saved if they 
will ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. ^Vhat then hinders their salvation ? 

A. ' Their mora/ inability, to repent and believli 
the Gospel.' 

Q. How came they by this moral inability ? 

A. * By a wise constitution of God, it is consider- 
ed a consequence of Adam's sin ?' 

Q. Did Adam sin freely and unnecessarily ? 
A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Who influenced his will ? 

A. * God, by force of his decree, operated di- 
rectly on his will, exciting him thereby to comply 
with the external motive.' 

Q. Did Ged design Adam should be influenced 
to sin, when he made him ? and did Adam fulfil by 
that act, the will of his Maker ? A. ' Yes, he did.' 

Q. God then decreed that Adam should sin? 
A. 'Yes.' 

Q. Could Adam have broken that decree ? 

A. ' Yes ; as easy as I can snap a tow string.' 

Q, How so ? A. ' He had natural ability.' 

Q. Was then the decree irresistible ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. How could it have been broken ? 

A. ' It could not 5 because there was a moral in= 
ablity,'^ 



622 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABlLITr 

Q. How ? It could not, and yet it could ? A. * O 
yes, — there is no contradiction here — because there 
was a natural ability which is never exercised, 
and a moral iyiahility^ which always governs.' 

Q. Did God design the inability always to gov- 
ern ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Of what use then is this natural ability of 
which you speak ? 

A. * It serves to obviate the ./^?*mm?an objection 
against the doctrine of unconditional reprobation, 
fey vindicating the justice of God from the impeach- 
ment of partiality and cruelty in the condemnation 
of the reprobates.' 

Q. But is not the inlpediment of a moral inabil- 
ity as great as a natural inability would have been ? 

A. ' Yes ; but it fixes the culpability of impeni- 
tence upon the sinner himself, because it refers his 
obstinacy to the perversity of his will^ and says he 
loill not come to Christ and live.' 

Q. But is not this perversity of will under the 
control of God, and perfectly answerable to his good 
pleasure ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Do you not also affirm that it is in conse- 
quence of Adam's sin ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. And this sin with all its consequences, was 
in conformity to God's original design, and agree- 
able to his will ? A. * Yes.' 

Q. And how then can sinners be justly culpa- 
ble for acting under the influence of a resistless 
decree, and for fulfilling the eternal designs of God. 
A. ' .' 

Q, Your silence. Sir, indicates the perplexity in- 
to which your system has thrown you, does it not ? 
Did not God decree that precisely so many of the 
human family should be eternally miserable with- 
out any respect to their wicked works foreseen ? 

A. ^Ye.^.' 

^» Were not all their sins decreed, and brought 



AND MORAL INABILItY. 325 

to pass by the exciting agency of God ? A. ' Yes ; 
most certainly.' 

Q. Are they justly responsible for those sins 
which God produces in their hearts himself, and 
which contribute to the good of the universe ? 

A. ' We consider it self-evident that mankind are 
responsible. No man in his senses will deny it.' 

Q. That is not the question. Can you assign 
any reason on i/our ^stem why they should be res- 
ponsible ? 

A. ' Yes ; because the reprobates may be saved 
if they will.' 

Q. How ? Those reprobates who were damned 
from all eternity may be saved if they will ? 

A. 'They have natural ability to save themselves.^ 

Q. Have they any grace ? A. ' No ; but they 
have natural ability to love God without grace.' 

Q. Why then do they not love him, and thereby 
convert themselves into a gracious state without any 
grace ? 

A. ' Because they will not.' 

Q. But God has decreed that this laiTl not shall 
be converted into a shall not ; that is. He has de- 
creed they never shall be saved — has he not ? 

A. ' Yes ; but they have natural power to break 
that decree.' 

Q. Have they then an ability and an inability to 
be saved at the same time ? A. * Yes.' 

Q. Is there no contradiction here ? A. ' No/ 

Q. This then is your faith, is it ? A. ' Yes.' 

Q. Will you be so kind as to favour us with 
some scripture proof of your doctrine ? 

A. * I believe I cannot.' 

This candid confession, while it gives a fa- 
vourable impression of the honesty of your heart, 
affords an irrefragible evidence of the falsity of 
your theory, which amounts to this — The repro- 
bates have a natural ability to be saved without 



324 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

grace ; and as St, Paul has said, By grace ye afi 
saved, it proves that you have invented another 
system of salvation besides that revealed in the 
gospel ; or else, that all your talk about natural 
ability to be saved, is invented for the deception 
of mankind, who abhor the doctrine of uncondi- 
tional reprobation — and that they have a moral 
ability to be damned, which they must and will use \ 
which appears to have been invented as a substi- 
tute for the irresistible decree of reprobation ; and 
which the asserters of this doctrine of a dual ability 
consider so important that they are not willing to 
sacrifice it upon the altar of truth ; and therefore 
they have borrowed this pharisaic robe to wrap 
around the offensive partt)f the Calvinistic image, 
to hide its inconsistences from the view of rational 
minds. 

All those who have made themselves acquainted 
with the distinguishing traits of Hopkinsianism, will 
perceive that the answers subjoined to the pre- 
ceding questions, are in perfect conformity to its 
peculiar principles ; and, indeed, many of them the 
author has had given to him in conversation with 
some Hoj^kinsian ministers. The inferences to be 
drawn from such contradictory assertions, are so 
obvious, that it is thought needless to pursue them 
here. A man, indeed, must sacrifice common sense, 
scripture, and his rational powers, to believe them, 
after perceiving their native tendency. 

Now, we say, that this doctrine has a deceitful 
influence. Those who preach the Hopkinsian 
peculiarities respecting the atonement of Christ, 
natural and mora/ ability, unless they in the mean 
time stop to explain themselves respecting their 
doctrine of decrees, delude people into a belief 
that they believe God is willing to have mercy 
upon all mankind : when, at the same time, they 
firmly believe that an antecedent decree secur- 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 325 

ed the damnation of a defiuile number styled repro- 
bates, from all eternity ; that all the sins of their 
lives were not only decreed, but are now effected 
by the efficient operation of God upon their hearts ; 
that their moral inability is also the effect of the di- 
vine efficiency upon their will : but that, although 
they were thus predestinated to sin and damnation, 
Jesus Christ made an atonement for them, and now 
invites them to come to him and be saved, in direct 
opposition to the eternal decree of God, though he 
never had any intention of saving them. Now, 
pray tell us, how this notion of a moral inability 
thus induced, and which is perfectly pleasing to 
God, can fix the culpability of its operations upon 
man, and vindicate that other essential part of 
Hopkinsianism, from cruelty in the condemnation 
of the reprobates, which says, that this inability, 
and all its pernicious effects, were unalterably fix- 
ed by an irreversible decree. 

Its deceiifulness furthermore appears in holding 
out offers of salvation to those devoted reprobates, 
who were eternally doomed to utter destruction ; 
thereby deluding them into a belief that Christ is 
willing to save them. How can a Hopkinsian min- 
ister, who fully believes that a definite number of 
the human family were unconditionally destined to 
eternal ruin, all of whose sins are brought into ex- 
istence by the exciting agency of God, declare, at 
the same time, that their sins might be avoided, 
that they might be saved and come to the knowledge 
of the truth ? seeing he believes at the same time, 
that those persons are held, by the efficient opera- 
tion of God upon their hearts, under the invincible 
restraint of a moral inability. Must not the assert- 
ers of this doctrine have some mental reserve, when 
they thus unfold the willingness of God to save all 
mankind ? And how can this notion of a natural 
ability to love God without grace, when viewed in 

E e 



326 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

connexion with this moral inability, and the existing 
agency of God in the production of moral evil, vin- 
dicate either the goodness or justice of God, in pun. 
ishing mankind under such forbidding circumstan- 
ces ? Instead of exhibiting the character of God as 
in reality it is, this doctrine represents him in the 
characters of duplicity and cruelty — having one will 
to save his creatures, and another to damn them — 
and as mocking those with an offer of salvation^ who 
were designed for damnation from all eternity. — 
Now to say to persons in such circumstances that 
they are in a salvabie sto-te, and that God takes no 
pleasure in their eternal death, is to flatter them 
with false appearances. 

It would appear, therefore, that this heterogeneous 
mixture of natural ability and moral inability, has 
been compounded for the purposes of healing the 
w^ound which the sword of truth has made in that 
part of the dagon of Calvinism whence uncondition- 
al reprobation grew ; and yet, its zealous partizans, 
not being willing to abandon this idol of their 
hearts, have invented this salvo to make this image 
of deformity appear somewhat like the chaste vir- 
gin, pure Christianity, who, though she reprobates 
her disobedient children, it is because they unne- 
cessarily defile themselves by wilfully plunging 
into the mire of iniquity ; and then refuse to be 
washed in ihe fountain opened for sin and unclean- 
ness. 

This theory, indeed, respecting natural and mo- 
ral ability, appears plausible enough when viewed 
by itself. If by a moral inability be meant, that 
the only reason why the sinner is not saved is, that 
he will not be saved upon the terms of the gospel, 
■we yield to the correctness of the sentiment when 
viewed in connexion with that prominent truth of 
the gospel, which declares that Jesus Christ sin- 
cerely tasted deathf or every man; and which evin- 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 327 

ces the plenitude of divine goodness in the ample 
provisions of the gospel for a// men ; and when diS' 
connected with the notion of an unconditional and 
definite reprobation. But when viewed in connex- 
ion with this last sentiment, it ceases to be any rea^ 
son at all why men are not saved. A man firmly 
believing that God has, unconditionally, reproba- 
ted a definite number to sin and damnation, can- 
not seriously believe that their eternal destruction 
is only in consequence of their refusing to accept 
of mercy ; for, according to this scheme, there nev- 
er was any mercy for them to accept: hence they 
never refused to accept it ; unless we absurdly sup- 
pose a man refuses that which was never offered 
him: On the contrary, \h\smoralinahilily itself by 
which the abetters of this doctrine suppose repro- 
bates refuse mercy, is a consequence of God's de- 
cree of reprobation, and not the decree of rcpro» 
bation a consequence of their refusing to accept of 
mercy. Now, if, according to this leading princi- 
ple of Hopkinsianism, there never was any mercy 
or grace for these reprobates; and if, according 
to Mr. Williston, Christ never designed to save 
them when he atoned for them, then then never 
zvas any offer of salvation made them; and there- 
fore they never r fused to accept of salvation : how 
then, in the name of reason and common sense, can 
they be condemned for not accepting that which 
was iiever offered them ? Can a man be condemn- 
ed for not doing that which God never designed he 
should do ? Therefore, we contend, that on the sys- 
tem of Hopkinsianism, which, in respect to indi- 
vidual reprobation, shakes hands with Calvinism, 
this twin doctrine of natural ability and moral in- 
ability, affords no reason at all for the final con- 
demnation of the incorrigibly wicked. On this 
scheme the only potent reason for their eternal 
condemnation, is God's own good pleasure, which 



32S REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

is indicated in the irreversible decree of reproba- 
tion. Hence it is said, that this notion of quarel- 
ling^ abilities it but an artificial covering to hide 
the dismal feature of Calvinistic reprobation. — 
However true, therefore, this doctrine of moral in- 
ability and natural ability, it can never harmonize 
with the Galvinistic decree of reprobation, nor 
serve the purposes of its authors in vindicating the 
claims of divine justice in the condemnation of re- 
probates. 

This is not all: Blan's responsibility, growing 
out of his free agency, is a truth so evident to ev€- 
ry man, that although contradicted by the doctrine 
of irresistible decrees, it could not be discarded as 
an error. What then was to be done ? Why, to 
avoid the appearance of direct hostility to this 
most evident truth, and save that fundamental part 
of Calvinism, universal decrees, the Hopkinsians 
have invented this novel doctrine of a natural ahili- 
fy to break God's decrees and get to heaven ; but 
to prevent this giant of human nature from making 
such a fatal depredation upon the eternal purpose 
of God, this diminutive animal of a moral inability 

* Perhaps this expression may sound odd, as well as harsh to 
some of my readers. But yet, if duly considered, it will be 
found to coinvey appropriate ideas of these abilities; for, accor- 
ding- to our antagonist, they are in perpetual hostility to each 
other. The natural abilitf/ is a capacity or power to love God : 
the moral inability is an jncapacity or warit of power to love 
him : so that, however this natural ability might exert itself in 
■striving- to love God, this moral inability hobles in the way, and 
prevents the reprobate from loving- God. And what is most 
lamentable, this weak^ peevish something, called an innbrlity or 
want of power^ is always master, keeping this strong manly 
something, called an ability^ always under his dominion. Such 
paradoxes are not uncommon, since we have been taught to 
believe that reprobates and devils may love God if theif will. 
But two abilities pursuing such difiisrent ends, may certainly 
be said to quarrel with each other. They are, however, both 
rigkt^ if God's decrees areri^/t^, as the Hopkinsians doubtless 
believe hey are. 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 329 

proclaims war upon natural ability, overcomes him, 
and carries him, with the reprobate in which he 
inheres, captive to hell. To apologize for this 
rude conduct, it is said, that, in consequence of his 
inability, this reprobate has freely followed his in- 
clination, chose and acted as he pleased, and there- 
fore he is responsible : although, the friends of this 
desperado of an inability, fully believe that this 
unhappy man chose and acted under the imme- 
diate control of an Almighty energy : that all his 
wicked actions are the effect of a Divine efficiency 
<lirect!y operating upon his heart, and influencing 
his will ; producing by this secret operation the 
desire and choice to do as he did ; therefore, say 
they, he is free and accountable ! How so ? Why 
he had natural power to have resisted this divine 
operation, but no moral power, that is, he choose 
to do otherwise. Thus God, while he secretly in- 
fluences the sinner to sin on and be damned, lie 
makes him believe that he acts perfectly free. — 
For which of these must the sinner be condemned/ 
For acting as God designed he should ? or for 
being deceived in supposing himself free ? 

But the deceitfulness of this theoretical phan- 
tom does not end here. Theorttical errors have 
more or less inlluence upon the praciict of man- 
kind. If the human mind can once be brought to 
believe that the God of heaven can deal thus de- 
ceitfully with his blinded creatures, making them be- 
lieve they are free, while bound by the influence 
of His own efficient hand, telling them they may 
be saved, though their dauination was secured eter- 
nally — as Christianity calls upon its votaries to 
imitate its adorable Author — how easy and natu- 
ral to persuade ourselves that we may use the arts 
of deception with our fellow creatures. And how 
many are deceived in the present day by the in- 
fluence of this pernicious system ! While an old^ 

E e 2 



330 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

fashioned Calvinist tells you he believes in uncon- 
ditional election and reprobation, he honestly con- 
fesses, that Jesus Christ never died for the repro- 
bates, and therefore they cannot be saved : but a 
Hopkinsian, and Mr. W. for one, with an incon- 
sistency peculiar to himself, though he professes 
faith in a partial covenant of redemption, and an 
•eternal, unconditional reprobation, nevertheless, 
tells you that Christ " hath put all men into a saU 
vahle state ;" that all may be saved if they will ; 
while he believes those very reprobates act under 
the influence of a moral inabiliti/, resulting imme- 
diately from God's exciting agency. Now I ask 
every deliberate roan, if the proclaiming a free 
salvation to all mankind, in connection with these 
partial views of the scheme of Redemption, and 
this restricted operation of divine goodness, does 
not indicate a solicitude to screen those vulnerable 
parts of their system from public inspection, and 
to impose upon the unsuspecting mind a fallacious 
hope in the mercy of God. Such must be the ne- 
cessary effect of this doctrine upon all those whose 
piety is not sufficiently strong to counteract the de- 
-ceitful influence of the system. 

These things being considered, should we be 
surprised, if their system should so insensibly 
warp their minds from the honest simplicity of 
truth, as to induce them, when the interests of their 
cause require it, as much as possible to withhold 
from the public, their doctrine of a secret and eter- 
nal determination to influence men to mora/ evil, 
and then damn them for it, — while they proclaim 
aloud the revealed will of God, which invites all 
mankind to come to Christ and be saved? They 
certainly should not be censured for imitating the 
God they worship. And how far does this modern 
doctrine of a secret will, dift'er from the occult 
science of the ancient philosophers, and from the 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 331 

secret mysteries of the Eleusinian school, taught 
Snd practised among the heathens, termed ihe mys- 
teries of the god ? Also, how intimately related is 
this conduct of our modern divines, who thus strive 
to cover up their doctrine of secret decrees, with 
the veil of a natural and moral ability^ to the con- 
duct of those heathen philosophers, whom the apos- 
tle condemns for hiding the truth unrighteously ! 

If they believe that God has two wills by which 
he is governed, one secret, and the other revealed, 
the secret declaring that mankind shall sin, and the 
revealed declaring he shall not sin, is it not natural 
to conclude that they may also have a two-fold end 
in view, one secret and real, which they steadily 
pursue, the other visible and ostensible merely, 
wnich they only profess to pursue ? And if the se- 
cret will or decree of God is the " rule by which he 
regulates his own conduct" in opposition to his re- 
vealed will, would it be a wonder if those who have 
this double view of his conduct, should so far imi- 
tate him as to adopt a secret method for the attain- 
ment of a secret end, while they have a revealed me- 
thod for the attainment of an ostensible end ? And if 
they believe God deceives mankind by solemnly de- 
claring he hath no pleasure in their death, notwith- 
standing he hdid secretly decreed [heir dedilh or ever the 
earth was, or tne round world was made, may they 
not be templed to delude the people with great pro- 
feosions of love to their souls, while they are only 
seeking to enslave their consciences, and to aggran- 
dize themselves at the people's expense. Who 
"will say that mankind ouglit to be more sincere and 
upright than the God they worship ? Suppose this 
double mind should influence them to profess a migh- 
ty zeal for the honour and glory of God, while they 
only seek their own temporal aggrandizement, are 
they not .sanctioned in this double dealing by their 
two-principled deity ? What if such comprehen- 



332 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

sive plans are devised as tend to draw all unsus- 
pecting parties into them, under pretence of ex- 
tending the influence of evangelical truth, while the 
secret design is to monopolize the wealth of the na- 
tion, and ultimately become independent of the peo- 
ple ; can we say that the system we are opposing 
does not afford a pretext for such deceitful conduct ? 
In the mean time, suppose, under a conviction that 
the system of truth, which honestly opens the door 
of mercy to all mankind, and /ai/A/wi/t/ declares the 
unwillingness of God that any should perish, had 
become so popular in some places, as to render an 
attack upon it dangerous ; a man who believes in 
partial redemption, and predetermined reprobation, 
to hide his real sentiments, should openly profess 
his belief in the impartial doctrines of the gospel, 
and should declare to sinners that they all may be 
saved if they will — might not a man under such cir- 
cumstances secretly silence the accusations of his 
conscience, by reminding himself that his God has 
a tu^o-fold will, one secr&t and the other revealed? 
Is there any more appearance of duplicity in the 
conduct of such men, than there is in that conduct 
which the Hopkinsians ascribe to their God, when 
they say he decreed the eternal destruction of a part 
of mankind, and yet declares all may be saved if 
they will ? If a man can persuade himself to believe 
that God, who hOiS forhidde7i all manner of wicked- 
ness, does, nevertheless, secretly incline mankind to 
commit it, and then punishes them forever for hav- 
ing committed it, may he not also persuade himself 
that it is right for him to use artful insinuations, se- 
cretly designing thereby to impose upon the unsus- 
pecting multitude, by his professions of love and 
good will, while his real object is to establish him^ 
self in some comfortable living ? 

We consider, therefore, that this doctrine, which 
wears such a deceitful aspect, has a most dan- 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 33a 

gerous tendency upon the morals of society. It 
naturally tends to corrupt the mind from that ho- 
nest simplicity which characterizes the unsuspect- 
ing follower of tfie Lord Jesus ; and must ultimate- 
ly weaken the bonds of moral obligation. For if 
1 can believe that the God I worship is pleased with 
lying, cheating, stealing, &c. and that he has de- 
creed and now excites in my heart^a disposition to 
commit those evils, how natuial to infer the lawful- 
ness of indulging that disposition. It is true, the 
lawfulness of such crimnal actions would be sus- 
pecled by reflecting minds, because the laiv of God 
forbids them : but when it is suggested that this law 
is superseded by a prior decree of the same Almigh- 
ty being, that its precepts should be violated ; and, 
to secure such violation, a moral inability had been 
induced by the secret operation of the divine hand 
upon the human heart, my sense of obligation to obey 
this law must be very much weakened, if not total- 
ly destroyed : and the present inability which I feel, 
and have been taught to refer to a cause totally be- 
yond the reach of my control, furnishes me with an ex- 
cuse for every immoral act. Thus does this fatal doc- 
trine, by the native tendency of its several parts, 
gradually undermine the foundation of moral obli- 
gation, destroy the motives to a virtuous conduct, 
and furnishes man with an excuse for his criminal 
inclinations and actions. 

Moreover, of what use is it to preach against 
wickedness, so long as we believe that such wick- 
edness is the effect of a divine efficiency, perfectly 
pleasing to God, and morally impossible to be 
avoided ? We cannot, therefore, view this doctrine 
in any other light than a cunningly devised fable, 
softly insinuating itself into men's minds, with a 
view to obliterate from their remembrance those 
painful sensations which had been produced by 
Calvinistic reprobation ; and which has a most per- 



33^ REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITV 

nicious tendency in corrupting the mind from the 
simplicity of truth, and in exciting the vicious in- 
clinations of mankind to criminal indulgence. It is 
certainly painful to feel under thetiece^sity of say- 
ing these things. And we would, by no means, be 
understood that these sad effects are uniformly pro- 
duced in the minds of all those who advocate the 
sentiments we oppose. Hume could theorize in his 
study, but, according to his own confession, his 
theory forsook him the nioment he entered into com- 
pany. He then thought and acted like other men ; 
and exemplified in practice those self evident truths, 
which his private speculations taught him to reject. 
So that natural restraint which a sense of moral 
obligation imposes upon mankind, and the influence 
of evangelical truth on the Christian world, prevent 
the fatal tendency of that absurd system, which 
avers that men have iiatural power to break God's 
eternal decree, and a moral ahility which always 
predominates, to keep that decree of reprobation ; 
and which also asserts that every sinful act is induced 
by a pre-disposing cause which uniformly operates 
in conformity to the divine will and pleasure. And 
how far this system may have influenced its parti- 
zans to any of those evils which it seems naturally 
calculated to induce, it is not presumed to assert. 
But we seriously consider it the imperious duty of 
every man, who can distinguish between truth 
and error, virtue and vice, to use his influence in 
checking the progress of a system so manifestly 
tending to mischievous consequences, and so ruin- 
ous to the morals and souls of mankind. If we are 
under a mi'^take in our views respecting the doc- 
trine now opposed, we have the consolation of re- 
flecting, that we are conscientiously, and, after using 
the best helps to form a correct judgment, honestly 
deceived. We have the farther consolation in re- 
electing, that if our antagonists are rights we cannot 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 335 

be wrong : but if we are right they are most cer- 
tainly wrong : for if all mankind are under the in- 
fluence of the efficient hand of God, whether by 
means of a natural or moral ability, so that all our 
powers are entirely directed by him, as God cannot 
do wrong, so we are infallibly right : but if ihe 
cause for which we contend, is founded in truth, 
then is the docirine of our antagonists wrong, and 
they are also doing wrong in opj)Osing us. Acting 
under the influence of this conviction, we feel cur- 
selves excited from a sense of duty, to oppose those 
principles which we consider, not only erroneous 
in themselves, but also as having a pernicious in- 
fluence upon the minds of men, and of most des- 
tructive consequence to the peace and happiness 
of human society. 

Neither can we perceive how our antagonists can 
seriously retort these observations upon us. If they 
firmly believe their doctrine, that all things are ac- 
cording to the counsel of God's will, perfectly pleas- 
ing to him, how can they suppose any thing can 
have any farther a destructive influence than God 
designed it should? Certainly, if any thing be wrong, 
according to their theory, it must be so because 
God decreed it should be so* Why then do they 
manifest such an extreme solicitude respecting the 
result of those events which they believe are in per- 
fect conformity to the original intention of Almighty 
God ? Do they not, every time they oppose their 
theological adversaries, exhibit a practical rel'uta- 
tion of their own principles, and evince a secret 
distrust in the correctness of their theory ? They 
ought not, however, to be blamed for yielding to the 
influence of a moral inability, of which they found 
themselves blessed independent of their choice, 
and which is quite beyond their own control. 

Not only the doctrine of a moral inability is con- 
trary to sound divinity, but the phraseology is high- 



SSS REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

\y objectionable. To speak properly, we should 
say that it is morally impossible any man should sin. 
Afiy thing is morally impossible which is contrary 
to the moral law. And it is morally possible for all 
men to obey the moral law. This maxim, as well as 
the manner of expressing it, derives its authority 
from the moral perfections of God, whose law is 
adapted to the moral condition of man, and who has 
surrounded man with those moral restraints as are 
calculated to deter liim from sin, and with those 
moral incentives as are calculated to lead him to 
holiness. Being thus blessed with a knowledge 
of his moral duty, and surrounded with moral res- 
traints and incentives, it is proper to say, it is mor- 
ally impossible for man to violate the precepts of the 
law; and morally possible he should obey them. — 
But finding that he resists all those incentives to 
holiness, and breaks through all those restraints, it 
is naturally possible (i. e. not absolutely impossible) 
for him to sin, and naturally impossible for him, of 
himself, to be holy. To overcome this natural im- 
possibility, the grace of the gospel is afforded him ; 
which, gently instilling itself into the understanding, 
and powerfully drawing the heart towards G od, the 
sinner, using his moral powers as he ought, wil- 
lingly bows to the superior attraction of divine 
grace, and finally becomes a convert to Jesus Christ. 
To say, therefore, that sinners have a moral ina- 
bility, is to adopt a language repugnant to the laws 
of propriety, — being condemned by those legitimate 
inferences which originate from the moral perfec- 
tions of God, and the moral adaption of his law, 
and the admirable fitness of his gospel, to the moral 
and relative condition of man. All things which 
the law of God commands, and all the gospel re- 
quires, are morally possible ; and therefore all who 
reject the gracious offers of the gospel, and diso- 
bey the injunctions of the law, do those things which 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 387 

are morally impossible. They are denominated 
morally impossible because incompatible with a 
right use of man's moral powers ; and morally poS' 
s'lble because they are precisely adapted to man's 
state as a free, morale and responsible being. The 
gospel supplies all those defects which originate 
from man''s native depravity. 

Let us, however, examine this Hopkinsian theo- 
ry respecting a moral inability, consisting altogeth- 
er in the perversity of the will, a little further. Ac- 
cording to that theory, the will is invested with a 
sort of sovereign authority over the man, impelling 
him to follow its fantastical dictates, wherever it 
may lead the way. Thus, in that system of theol- 
ogy, the will serves as a universal menstruum^) dis« 
solving all the knotty difficulties it contains, eating 
with such rapacity, that it acquires such gigantic 
strength as to break God's eternal decree, and 
bring the reprobate, who is destined by a divine 
order to hell, back to heaven. The will^ in fact, 
according to this theory, is exalted to a god, and 
exercises in the empire of Hopkinsianism, the same 
unlimited sway, that decree does in the dominion 
of Calvinism. 

The propriety of attributing to the will, such 
complete dominion over the destinies of man, may 
be fairly questioned. It appears to us much more 
rational, to conclude the soul, however undefinable 
and uncompounded, to be something which has a 
power within itself to zoiil, think, and act freely, 
under the persuasive influence of those motives 
with which the Creator has surrounded it ; and that 
this thinking, willing, and active something, when 
objects are presented to its consideration, has a 
power to select at pleasure, whichever it chooses. 
However dark, or weak, it may have become in 
consequence of original depravity, and whatever 
aversion it may have to spiritual things naturally, 

F f 



338 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

yet through the preventing grace of God, and the 
persuasive influence of those commanding motives 
-v^'hich the gospel reveals, it may overcome that aver- 
sion, become enlightened, and be strong through 
the Lord Jesus Christ. If this is a correct view 
of the subject, and its correctness seems confirmed 
by the experience and observation of mankind, 
the soul has power, when an object of choice is 
presented to the understanding, to act in conform- 
ity, or contrary to its previous inclination ; and 
this choice is neither directed, nor prevented by 
a resistless excitement of Almighty God ; nor yet 
determined by the restraining influence of a moral 
inability : but is an exercise of that active power 
with which all rational beings are endowed. — 
The overcoming this native disinclination to good, 
through the gracious and resistible operation of 
divine agency, and the right use of our active pow- 
ers, constitutes what, in the language of the gospel, 
is called the cross, which every man is required to 
take up in order to be a disciple of the Lord Jesus : 
otherwise no man bears any cross at all ; for cer- 
tainly there can be no cross in following our incli- 
nation merely. 

In respect to the willj it seems to be the result of 
deliberation, unless we suppose that previous act 
of the mind, by which a person resolves to delibe- 
rate whenever a subject of deliberation is present- 
ed to the mind, is the first existence of the will. 
For instance ; 'suppose a man were requested to 
make a donation to some charitable institution ; 
the first volition of the mind is to consider whether 
it be consistent for him to comply with the requi- 
sition j and after deliberating, he forms his deter- 
mination, which determination he communicates to 
the solicitor by saying, / will, or / will not. Un- 
til he had deliberated, be had no will at all re- 
specting giving or withholding, nor any will in re- 



AND MORAL INABILITY* 339 

ference to that particular object. Now, it would 
sound extremely aukward for this man, after hav- 
ing deliberated upon this subject, to say, my will 
wills to give, or my will wills to withhold. But if 
he were to accommodate his language to that 
theory which makes the will the governing faculty 
of the soul, he would say, my toUI must be con- 
sulted ; and if it consent, he should sa}^, my will 
determines to do thus and so, instead of saying, / 
determine. This phraseology, however, has never 
been adopted by any people, although the theory 
on which it is obviously founded, has been admit- 
ted both by })hilo3ophers and divines. 

With all deference, therefore, to those who have 
adopted the phraseology, I consider it extremely 
improper to say The will is a self determining pi-in- 
ciple of the soul ; because it supposes a sort of in- 
dependent power invested in a particular faculty 
of the soul, which domineers over the whole man, 
laying all his powers prostrate befoie the whimsi- 
cal dictates of the will ; whereas the will has no 
positive existence, in reference to a particular sub- 
ject, until the man resolves, deliberates, and deter- 
mines ; and this operation of the soul is itp will. — 
Hence the universal language of mankind, / will 
and / loill not, involves the principle for which we 
contend, namely, that man is master of himself. 
When a subject is submitted to him for investiga- 
tion, he first wills to deliberate, and communicates 
the result of his deliberation by saying / will^ or I 
will not. 

Neither is a man under the necessity of follow- 
ing the dictates of his judgment ; but he possesses 
an intrinsic energy by which he may sever the 
connexion between his judgment and will, and act 
in direct opposition to the dictates of his judgment ; 
otherwise he is not justly condemnable : for if a 
man act at all times agreeable to the decisions of 



o40 IlEMAKKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

his judgment, and that by a necessary connexion 
existing between the judgment and the determina- 
tions of his mind, how can he be justly condemned 
for any of his actions ? How many there are, who, 
amid all the surrounding evidences of God's love, 
the certain excellence of Christianity, the dread- 
ful consequences of disobedience to its sacred in- 
junctions, and the happy effects of heartily em- 
bracing its doctrines and precepts, deliheraiely 
close their eyes upon all this glare of divine light, 
and obstinately pursue, in direct opposition to their 
enlightened judgments, the paths of folly and vice. 
And has not our divine Lord recognized this senti- 
ment in those well known words, ' This is the con- 
demnation, that light is come into the world, and 
men love darkness rather than light, because their 
deeds are evil.' And did he not also reprove the 
Pharisees for suffering their pride and ambition to 
bribe their better informed judgments, in the follow- 
ing words ? 'If ye were blind, ye should have no 
sin ; but nov/ ye say. We see \ therefore your sin 
remaineth.' — To say therefore, that a man is under 
either a physical or moral necessity of following 
the last dictate of his judgment, is as contrary to 
sacred scripture as it is to sound philosophy. 

The holy scriptures most evidently presuppose 
the principle for which we now contend. God ad- 
dresses himself to man, and not to a particular fac- 
ulty denominated the will. And after having pre- 
sented the grand and awfully interesting subjects 
of happiness and misery, heaven and hell, time 
and eternity, balancing the respective claims of 
God calls upon man to choose which he will, 
' I'^ivw YE from your evil ways; for why will ye 
die ?' ' 1 have set life and death before you, there- 
ibre choose YE.' He does not say. Let your zct"// 
choose. ' Ye WILL not come unto me, that ye 
might have life.' He does not say your will wiU 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 341 

not let you come ; but ye will not — - Ye will not 
suffer yourselves to be influenced, by my warnings 
and invitations, to forsake your sinful prejudices, 
and come unto me that ye might have life.' la 
these instances, we perceive the language of in- 
spiration accommodating itself to the theory for 
which we contend ; namely, that the vjill is the 
whole man in operation^ either for or against the 
truth. How strange would it sound, were it said, 
ye would have come to me, but your will would 
not let you. But we find no such language in the 
holy scriptures. 

From this scriptural and rational view of the 
subject under consideration, we perceive the man- 
ifest absurdity of the Hopkinsian speculations con- 
cerning a moral inability, consisting altogether in 
the perversity of the will, as if that turned the 
scale in every thing. This unintelligible some- 
thing, which they sometimes denominate the will, 
and sometimes a moral inability, occupies, as be- 
fore observed, in their system, precisely the same 
place, and performs the same functions, whichya^e 
did in heathenism, and 2ls decree does in Calvinism ; 
and appears to have been invented for the purpose 
of obviating the Arminian objection to the doctrine 
of Calvinistic reprobation, respecting the injustice 
of consigning those reprobates to hell for not doing 
what they never had any power to do. Hence, say 
the advocates of this phantasm, men have natural 
power to counteract the influence of God's decree, 
but never do it, because they have no moral pow- 
er ; and when you ask them to explain what they 
mean by this moral power, they tell you it is the 
will — reprobates and devils might love God if they 
would, but they will not. But the fact is, a man 
has no will respecting a particular subject, until 
that subject is presented to his mind ; and then he 
may will to consider upon it or not ; and finally, 

Ff2 



342 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

will to accept or reject, according to his own 
choice. 

Thus, when God calls upon sinners to repent, 
the subject of Christianity presenting itself to their 
minds in all its bearings, they deliberate upon it, 
if they act understandingly, whether it be best to 
comply with the call or not ; and if they conclude 
it best to comply, their language is. We will — We 
will return unto the Lord, we will believe in Jesus 
Christ J they do not say, Our will resolves we shall 
repent, and therefore we must yield a compliance 
to its lordly dictates. Hawever absurd such lan- 
guage may appear, it is but the legitimate offspring 
of this mother of inconsistency, that the will is a 
constituent faculty of the soul, exercising a lordly 
influence over the whole man. The moment we 
accommodate our phraseology to the theory we 
are opposing, respecting the will possessing a pre- 
ponderating influence over the man, leading him 
captive to its capricious humour, we see its mani- 
fest inconsistency. All those forms of speech, found 
in the sacred scripture, in moral writers, and in 
our verbal communications with each other, justify 
the doctrine for which we plead, that the will is 
ihe effect, or result of deliberation, or that which is 
induced by the presentation of any query or sub- 
ject, concerning which the mind resolves to delib- 
erate. The first existence, then, of the will in 
i'eference to any particular subject, is the first act 
of the mind respecting that subject — I say in re- 
ference to diuy par iicul a?' subject ^ because the mind 
is always active — always willing or nilling respect- 
ing something. 

Hence the immaterial spirit of man, is an unde^ 
finable something invested by its Creator with so- 
vereign authority (subordinate, however, to the 
wise and beneficient government of God) over itself, 
and which thinks, deliberates and acts freely. Of 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 343 

this every man may be conscious if be attend to 
what passes in his own breast — and the best proof 
of man is man himself — If he will calmly attend to 
what passes in his own mind, though he cannot ex- 
plain how, nor assign the reasons wherefore, he will 
find such self-evident demonstrations of his own do- 
minion over himself, as shall completely nullify all 
the erroneous conclusions drawn from theories 
which have been adopted to support a favourite 
system. Every man is conscious of such a princi- 
pal of action as involves responsibility ; and his de- 
liberate judgment tells him that he cannot be 
responsible for actions which are induced by ne- 
cessity ; but if he be bound by an invincible moral 
inability^ will, disposition, or inclination, or what- 
ever other name may be given to the. controling 
power, to only one line of conduct, however plea- 
sant it may be to him, neither justice nor goodness 
can assign any reason why he should be con- 
demned. 1 say however pleasant it may be to him ; 
for if the disposition to choose be entirely directed 
by an Almighty predisposing cause, inducing the 
sinner either by a secret operation upon his heart, 
or by the presentation of external motives, to 
choose as he does, although it may be said that he 
does as he pleases, it alters not the stale of the case ; 
because, according to our opponents, all those 
things came to pass only in consequence of the ex- 
citing agency of God upon his heart. These things 
being considered, pray tell us, ye who have studied 
this system, how the Hopkinsian theory of natural 
ability, and moral inability will obviate the Ai*mi- 
nian objection against Calvinislic reprobation ; or 
rescue the justice of God from the impeachment of 
cruelty, in the condemnation of the reprobates ? 
That doctrine says, that the natural ability and mo- 
ral inability, all the desires of the heart, intetnal 
5ind external motives, all the actions of the life. 



344 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

whether righteous or wicked, are according to 
God's original decree, and are now produced by 
the efficient hand of God. Now if this be so, of 
what use is a natural ability, or a moral inability. 
Can either the strength of the one, or (he feebleness 
of the otherj counteract the immutable decree of 
heaven, or resist the irresistible influence of the 
universal divine efficiency? So little do these subtle 
refinements respecting natural and mora) ability, 
benefit the system they are designed to support. 

Upon the whole, therefore, I conclude, that it is not 
the " words which 1 have used as making a true re- 
presentation of their sentiments, which seem to have 
such a strange clashing with each other, that the 
inattentive reader would be led to imagine, that 
none but men more fit for a mad house, than to be 
Christian teachers, could ever believe and propo- 
gate such self- contradictory doctrines," (p. 135.) 
but it is that doctrine of my antagonist that has such 
a strange clashing that the attentive reader must 
perceive that none but those who are extremely 
puzzled to support a favourite theory, would ever 
attempt to vindicate. Of this I believe every im- 
partial observer must be convinced who attentively 
weighs the preceding observations. To suppose 
that men have natural power to love God Avith all 
the heart without grace, and without any disposi- 
tion, is one of the incredible paradoxes reserved 
for the perfecting of modern divinity ; and it so 
clashes with the essential doctrines of the reformation, 
with the word of the living God, and is so abhor- 
rent to the dictates of common sense, that 1 believe 
k would be difficult to persuade even a mad-man, 
much less a sober man^ to believe it. But when we 
are further told that these men, who were uncon- 
ditionally reprobated to eternal burnings by an im- 
mutable decree of God, have natural power without 
any disposition^ to break that decree, regenerate 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 345 

chemselves, and be prepared for heaven, we candid- 
ly think such absurd notions are more fit for a 
" mad-house" than for a Christian temple : and 
that it is high time for the teachers of such '* clash- 
ing" doctrines to put themselves into the school of 
sober reason, until they are prepared for the high- 
er branches of scriptural divinity, which exhibits 
and illustrates the harmonious doctrines of Jesus 
Christ. They will then learn to proclaim a con- 
sistent scheme of divine doctrines, which hara'onizes 
all the divine attributes, ])resents the Saviour of sin- 
ners in the transcendent glories of his character as 
having atoned for the sin of the world ; and also 
opens a door of mercy to all men, by showing the 
efficacy of the Holy Spirit, who comes to enlighten 
the dark minds of sinners, to restrain their evil dis- 
positions, and to enable them to overcome the na- 
tural or moral aversion of their hearts, come to Christ 
and live. Likewise, to exhibit an impartial God, 
eternally existing in the sacred Unity of Trinity, the 
plenitude of whose uncreated goodness, is manifest- 
ed in granting unto all men a probationary state. 
Yes, they would then unfold the wonderful design of 
Creating, Redeeming, Pardoning, and Sanctifying 
love, so eminently exemplified in the grand system 
of revelation. Guided by this ray of divine light, 
the mind is enraptured at the view of the unbound- 
ed wisdom, the untarnished justice, the unfathom- 
able love, and the impartial goodness of the Triune 
God. in devising, executing, and revealing the su- 
perexcellent and comprehensive system of redemp- 
tion and salvation. With hearts imbued with this 
love, with what supreme delight does the tongue 
proclaim the wonders of redeeming; grace ! Em- 
bracing all mankind in the aims of love, with what 
sincerity, faith, and unutterable delight may we in- 
vito sinners to come to Christ and live. Standing 
upon this eminence, raised by the dying groans of 



346 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

Jesus Christ, with what holy rapture do we look up 
to the Throne of God, while we behold the impar- 
tial God, demonstrating his love to all the human 
family ; and with what commisseration do we look 
down upon our lost world, while we call upon them 
to accept of eternal life. While the heart swells 
with gratitude to our adored God, from this delight- 
ful view of his sacred character, it is drawn forth 
with the tenderest sympathy toward the human 
race. Being authorized from this scriptural repre- 
sentation of the divine economy, we joyfully pro- 
claim in the ears of our fellow men, the unsearch- 
able riches of Christ — assuring them upon the most 
indubitable testimony, that they all have been com- 
prehended in the grand scheme of redemption. 

On the other hand — With what truth, with w-hat 
justice, may we denounce the penalties of God's 
righteous law against its bold violaters. To such 
we may say : The law you have unjustly violated : 
The gospel you have despised : Jesus Christ who 
died for you, you have neglected : The Holy Spirit 
you have grieved : In a word, you have slighted, 
abused, and finally rejected that goodness which the 
Holy God had mercifully offered unto you. Reject- 
ing the sincere offers of life and salvation you have 
treasured up to yourselves wrath against the day of 
wrath, and the revelation of the righteous judgment 
of God. Your condemnation, therefore, originates 
necessarily, from the nature of your own conduct, 
from your own voluntary rejection of eternal life. 

These are the awfully interesting truths with 
which Christianity gently assails mavikind, and by 
which it powerfully recommends itself to every 
man'^s conscience in the sight ofGod* 

And do we perceive any strange clashing among 
these truths ? Do we not perceive them all concen- 
trating in the perfections of God ; and from thence 
branching out in various directions, amplifying, 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 347 

and suiting themselves to the various relations, con- 
ditions, and characters of men ? How diminutive 
does poor, fallen, and guilty man appear, while 
this glaie of divine light shines upon him ! And how 
Iransccndently glorious does the Triune God ap- 
pear, while the mind views Him, through the medi- 
um of these sublime, and interesting truths. Not 
the smallest spot of eternal haired to one part of the 
human family, is beheld to darken the divinely glo- 
rious character of Jehovah — Not a cloud of repro- 
bating wrath is seen hovering in the luminous at- 
mosphere of gospel truth — until we see them rising 
from the stagnant pool of human corruption and 
perversity All around the divine throne, on which 
sits the God of power, justice, and goodness, en- 
circled with the bright rays of universal love, we 
behold, when elightened by the Sun of truth, evi- 
dent signs o{ good will to the degraded, suffering, 
and miserable sons of men : while, in this dark val- 
ley of human nature, We see evident tokens of de- 
pravity, wrath, variance, and opposition to God 
and goodness. We see, indeed, the wretched sons 
of men, madly pursuing their race in folly and 
wickedness;, shutting their ears against the Calls of 
divine mercy, and persisting, in spite of all the sig- 
nals of coming indignation, in the high road to 
hell ! At this dismal sight, the heart of the philan- 
thropist, filled with godly sorrow, cries out. Is there 
no help ? He looks up, and beholds a God — a Sa- 
viour — whose impartial love led him to die for those 
sinners. No sooner does this truth fasten upon the 
understanding, than the lover of human souls, an- 
nounces it unto these perishing sinners ; urging 
them by all that is dear to themselves, by the love 
of God, by the dying groans of Jesus Christ, not 
madly to rush on to their own destruction, but to 
return unto God and live. 

Armed with these truths, and surrounded by this 



348 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY 

flood of divine light, the minister of the Lord Jesus, 
may boldly step forth in the name of his Master, 
unfolding to a lost world, the sovereign remedy pro- 
vided for their diseased souls, and the willingness 
of Almighty God to apply it to them. Now, we 
think, that all who act under the influence of these 
haimonious truths of God, will perceive sufficient 
reason to believe that all men, during their proba- 
tionary state, have sufficient natural and moral 
power to repent of their sins, and to believe in Je- 
sus Christ Tvith a heart unto right eousne as. 

The preceding doctrines, and the arguments used 
in their defence, are submitted to the candid reader 
with all that confidence which a conscientious re- 
gard to truth, and a just abhorrence of error, are 
calculated to inspire. If the system of doctrines 
we have espoused is founded on the immoveable 
basis of truth, as we apprehend it is, it cannot be 
shaken by the arts of sophistry, nor rendered sus- 
picious by a patient, scriptural, and minute investi- 
gation. Truth looses none of its lustre, nor suffers in 
its intrinsic value, for passing through the alembic 
of a close, liberal, and candid criticism. It may, 
indeed*, be shaded by the imperfect manner in 
which it is exhibited, and the inefficient means em- 
ployed in its defence. It is hoped, however, that 
the lover of truth will be disposed to make a rea- 
sonable allowance for any incidental errors which 
may have incorporated themselves with the execu- 
tion of the present work, and let them have an 
apology in a consciousness of his own fallibility. 
The author pretends not to infallibility, nor to im- 
mediate inspiration. All he professes is, a sincere 
love of truth, and an ardent desire to perceive and 
follow its attractive influence wherever it may lead. 
If any of its native excellences are obscured by the 
imperfect medium through which they are exhibit- 
ed, or its lovely attire concealed by an unskilful 



AND MORAL INABILITY. 349 

hand, the reader is requested to have recourse to a 
more perfect mirror, the word of the living God ; 
and its divine glories will so pervade his soul, as 
to convince him that God, the sacred Author of 
truth, Is loving to every man^ and that his tender 
mercies are over all his works. 

But he is requested, for his own sake, to divest 
himself of prejudice, and to read without partiality. 
Not imitate those whose comprehensive minds see 
every thing with infallible clearness without a pain- 
ful thought ; and, as if the umpire of correct decis- 
ion were committed to them, can decide upon the 
merits of any question without a moment"'s reflec- 
tion. Such readers, which we ought not to be so- 
licitous to please, nor fearful to offend, will turn 
over an hundred pages in sullen suspense, unless 
they can discover some defect with Avhich they can 
gratify their petulant disposition. Perhaps, how- 
ever, at some future period, a knowledge of their 
own fallibility may dictate an apology for the un- 
avoidable frailties of human kind. But while the 
hasty decisions of these superficial thinkers, ex- 
pose their own vanity, and consign ihetn to merited 
contempt, the judicious remarks and liberal criti- 
cisms of the conscientious and the candid, always 
add, not only to the correctness of any work, but 
also to the stock of useful information. 

The friendly remarks of such enlightened minds, 
are like the pruning knife in the hands of a skilful 
gardener — they serve to lop off the useless twigs, and 
trim the tree of truth of any burdensome branches 
of error, which human weakness may have engraft- 
ed upon it. Knowing how to separate the precious 
from the vile, whenever they perceive the truth, 
they will embrace it for its own sake, however op- 
posite to their preconceived opinions. And, it is 
presumed that when such persons read the follow- 
ing soleraa words of Almighty God, ' As 1 live, saitb 



350 REMARKS ON NATURAL ABILITY, &C. 

the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the 
wicked,* they will not hesitate to declare that the 
doctrine which saith all things are according to 
God'^s pleasure, must be radically defective. 

May the time speedily come when all such erro- 
neous systems shall be exposed by the radiant 
beams of eternal truth, and the perspicuous doc- 
trines of the glorious gospel of God our Saviour, be 
\3niversally believed, experienced, and exemplified 
in practical life. Amen* 



FINIS. 



CONTENTS. 



CHAP. I 

On Universal Divine Agency and Efficiency. 

Remarks on Mr. W.'s title p. 9. — An explanatioa of those 
Scriptures which he adduced to prove that God is the cause 
of moral evil, 10 — Decrees and commands not opposite to each 
other, 16 — Remarks on the crucifixion of Christ, 18 — His death 
originated from love to sinners, 23 — And was miraculous, 25— 
Mr. W.'s arguments annihilate all unholiness, 29-And the con- 
sistency of truth, 33 — Excuses devils and wicked men, 34 — 
And renders useless a day of judgment, 35 — An examination of 
his notions of free agency, 36 — His misrepresentation detected, 
44 — A harmonious view of divine influence and human liberty, 
46 — A singular argument of Mr. W.'s, 4B — A fallacy detected, 
60 — The character of an action to be determined from its owa 
nature 62 — A vindication of the axiom, That an effect par- 
takes of the moral likeness of its cause, 66 — Man not respon- 
sible for God's determinations, 78 — Mr. W.'s scheme refers all 
foolishness, absurdity, and wickedness to God, as their efficient 
cause, 81 — Revelation and reason harmonize in their testimo- 
ny, 89 — Direct scripture proof against Hopkinsiau decrees, 100 
— Pernicious tendency of his doctrine, 108 — It destroys the 
harmony of God's works, ib. — Exemplified by the opposite doc- 
trine, 1 10 — It disarms the ministerof God of arguments to con- 
vict the sinner of his guilt, 113 — Annihilates the axiom, that 
the character of a cause is to be ascertained from the effects 
produced, 114 — An objection answered, 119. 

CHAP. n. 

On Human Depravity. 

Mistakes rectified, 123 — Mr. W's distinction between justi- 
fication and regeneration examined, 1'27 — Dangerous tendea- 



352 CONTENTS. 

cy of his doctrine, 131 — Total depravity incompatible with the 
grace afforded to probationers, 1 32 — Explanation of human de- 
pravity, ibid — Reason for declining- noticing the scripture quo- 
tations of Mr. W. on this subject, 135 — His erroneous assertion 
respecting the Methodists being Pelagians, refuted, 136 — The 
foundation of moral obligation stated, 141 — No man required to 
love God without grace, 145 — Total depravity inconsistent with 
conviction for sin, 146 — Mr. W.'s inconsistent Christian, 148. 

CHAP. III. 

On the Scripture Doctrine of Election. 

Mr. W.'s mistake rectified, 150 — Election not founded on 
works, 151 — The reason why the Methodist doctrine does not 
found election upon works, 153 — ^Nor upon foreknowledge, 155 
■ — What we are to understand by unconditional election, 161 — 
Mr. W. seems to evade this point, 163 — But be makes, not only 
election, but regeneration unconditional, ibid — Reason why 
sinners are reprobatedj 164 — Application of the subject, 165. 

CHAP. IV. 

On the Possibility of Final and Total Apostacy* 

Proved from the conditionality of the decree of election, 163 
- — Mr. W.'s views of thfi norftnant of redemption erroneous^ 173 
—Proved from his own concessions, 177 — Universal atonement 
incompatible with partial redemption, 178 — And with national 
reprobation, 180 — Scripture proof against that doctrine, 161 — 
Distinction between atonement and salvation, 183— Mr. W.'s 
arguments canvassed, 184— His doctrine destroys the doctrine 
©f salvation by grace, 186 — Scriptural view of the scheme of re- 
demption and salvation, 191 — Mr. W.'s inconsistent view of 
the conditionality of the covenant of grace, 195 — Total aposta- 
cy proved, 1. From the example of Judas, 198 — 2. King Saul, 
200 — 3. Solomon, 202 — 4. The Israelites in the wilderness, 203 
—5. Hymeneus and Alexander, 204— Concluding remarks, 205. 

CHAP. V. 

On the Doctrine of Evangelical Perfection. 
The author regreta the necessity of exposing Mr. W.'s mis- 
representation, 206 — Methodists do not hold that saints are a& 






CONTENTS. 353 

sinless in this life as they will be ia heaven, 207— Mr. W. ac- 
knowledges he did not find the arg-ument to which he referred 
in his sermon in our Discipline, 208 — The reasons why we do 
not make Christians as perfect in this life as they will be in 
heaFen, 209 — His scheme makes the bible self- contradictory, 
212 — Proved from a contrasted view of scripture testimony, 
— Harmonious view of divine testimony, 216 — The seventh 
of Romans not descriptive of a justified believer, 218 — Mr. W. 
does not meet the arguments of his antagonist, 224 — Distinc- 
tion between justified and sanctified believers, 226 — Mr. W. 
confounds terms not s3'nonymous, 229 — Acknowledges sinful 
imperfection is wrong, and thus makes it our duty to oppose his 
decrees, 231 — His doctrine favours sin, 232 — By making sin 
necessary to a growth in grace, 237 — The falacy of that idea 
exposed, 238 — Evidence that his scheme does favour sin, 240 
—His doctrine shuts heaven against all men, unless they 
go there against their desire, 242 — A concise view of his jar- 
ring system, 243 — His censorious remarks noticed, 245— Or- 
der of God in saving souls, 247 — Practical use of the doc- 
trine of perfection, 249. 

CHAP. VI. 

On the Witness and Fruits of the Spirit. 

liittle opposition anticipated on this subject, 254 — The doc- 
trine stated, 255---And supported by scripture, ^57— The rea- 
der exhorted to weigh thoroughly this divine testimony, 262 — 
Fruits of the spirit not controverted, 263 — Illustration, ibid- 
Direct operation of the Holy Spirit necessary to produce its 
fruits 264 — Mr. VV.'s erroneous statement of our views upon 
this subject detected, 265 — His case commisserated, 269 — The 
direct witness of the Spirit proved by Mr. Williston himself, 
270— From President Edwards, 274— From Witsius, 275 — 
From the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, 278 — Agreement 
of different writers on this point, an evidence of its truth, ibid — 
Application of the doctrine, 279. 

CHAP. VII. 
On Christian Benevolence. 
Mr. Williston's explanation accepted, 289 — Therefore dis- 
interested benevolence is not attainable, 284 — Points on which 



354 



CONTENTS. 



we agree, 285 -Wherein we disagree, 286— A Christian not 
willing to be separated from the God he loves — Mr. W.'s argu- 
me«t on this subject canvassed, 287 — Vindication of the max- 
im. We love God because he first loved us, 289 — This doctrine 
does not approve of those " religious experiences which are 
bottomed on selfishness," 293. 

CHAP. VIII. 

Remarks on the Gospel Ministry. 

invidious distinctions not profitable, 294 — God, rather than 
man, to be vindicated, ibid — The author disting'uishes between 
the men and their arguments, 296 — Although from the manner 
of handhng this subject, the remarks must have a personal 
bearing, 29T — The peculiar traits of Hopkinsianism coincident 
to Satan's suggestions, ibid — ^The author regrets having no- 
ticed Mr. W.'s sermon on Satan's transformation — and why, 
298 — An apology for using irony, ibid — Satan blends truth and 
falsehood together, 302 — How far Mr W.'s misrepresentations, 
(303) and his attachment to a mixed state of sin and holiness 
are characteristic of a minister of Satan, is not determined, 304 
— Another mistake rectified — Soundness of doctrine essential 
to a gospel ministry, 305 — Pecuniary support allowable, 306 — 
A concise view pf Methodist doctrine, 307— Marks of a gosps* 
ministry, 309 — How ministers subserve the cause of Satan, 312 
Some mental errors consistent with fundamental truths, 313 — 
Scientifical attainments profitable for a minister, 314 — and 
soundness of doctrine essential, ibid-— Description of a gospej, 
minister, 315 — The author embraced Methodism from a con- 
viction of its truth, 316. 

CHAP. IX. 

Hemarks on Natural Ability and Moral Inability. 

Harmony of the several parts of a system an evidence of its 
truth, 316 — The theory of natural and moral ability as Mr. W. 
has explained it, only true when viewed in connexion with uni- 
versal atonement, 317 — But no man has either natural, or 
moral power to do an impossibility, 318 — This theory cannot 
vin(3icate the justice of God, in the condemnation of the eter* 



CONTENTS. S5a 

nally reprobated, 320 — Its deceitfulness shewn, 321 — It has a 
deceitful influence upon the practice of men, 329 — Tends to 
criminal indulgence, 332 — If our antagonists are right, we 
cannot be wrong, 334 — Their phraseology exceptionable, 335 
— Impropriety of attributing to the will a preponderating in- 
fluence over the destinies of men, 337 — Man has power, under 
the government of God, over his own volitions, 339 — Confirm- 
ed by scripture, 340 — Moral inability a substitute for decree, 
and fate, 341 — The theory of these abilities does not help the 
cause of its authors any, 343 — The several parts of Hopkinsi- 
anism clash against each other, 344 — Harmonious view of gos- 
pel truth, 345 — The author submits his doctrine and arguments 
to the candid inspection and criticism of his readers, 34S. 



ERRATTA. 



In the title page for viii. read vii. 
Page 14 Ime 1 6/rom bottom, forit into, read in. 

— 19 — Noteread Acts xiii. 48. instead of 43. 

— 130 — 21 from bottom, note, read were, instead of was. 

— — 12 from top, note for this, read the. 

— 147 — 14 from top, after the word go, put a comma ill" 

instead of a period. 

— 193 — 7 from top, erase to. 

— 258 — 5 from bottom, for on, read in. 

— 259 — 9 from top, for Apostles, read Apostle. 

— 311 — 6 from bottom, for bonafide, read bona-fide. 

— 317 — 10 from top, for in, read of. 



■''^^fF^ 



V>r". 













mH::(-i 



■J- - ^-'K j^:^^^*^ 



^F 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS ^ 








%.,- 



•X 



.^' . 










♦•* "^^-^^^^f"^ '>%fr-> 



M \ 



^^^ 









i^ V 



